Hacker News Reader

Comment by singpolyma3 | Hacker News Reader

I think I'm just too opinionated to go there. If I see something that works fine, but isn't the way I'd do it, it doesn't matter if a human or an LLM wrote it I'm still in there making it match my vision.

View on HN

This is the way. If you're a prick about quality and outcomes, whether you typed it with your digits or the robot spit it out is irrelevant.

What standard of result are you pursuing and are you willing to discipline yourself enough to achieve it?

AI can't make you un-lazy, no matter how many tokens you pay for.

100%. I don't think any senior programmer ever looks at another developer's code and says, "Oh yeah, that's just the way I'd do it."

So you are going to waste everyone's time getting another developer to write code the way you want? This resonates with me because at my company I get this all the time. At that point, you might as well close my PR and do it yourself, whatever way you want. I really like the advice from the book 0 2 1, to assign different areas of responsibility to people, so that there is no conflict.

> So you are going to waste everyone's time getting another developer to write code the way you want?

No one is suggesting that.

But I assume you don't go and change all your co-workers code just because they didn't do it how you would have done it?

Even the most toxic places I've worked that kind of behavior would totally get you canned.

I concur, and I think that is one of the most difficult aspects of reviewing another's code. It's difficult for me to sometimes differentiate between what is acceptable vs. what I would have done. I have to be very conscious to not impose my ideals.

That's not how most organizations work, AI or not.

What do you mean?

Organizations usually are not looking for employees who change things that work fine, just because it disagrees with the "vision" of one employee.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com