Hacker News Reader

Yes, that I can agree with.

If you just turn it loose on a codebase and ship it when it passes the tests you're asking for getting burned.

The most effective use of AI is in an environment which already produces high quality software through proven tooling and methodology. If your workflow is broken, your AI isn't going to fix that - except by way of giving you a lot of slop to push through whatever pipes you're already not getting flow through.

What's your workflow, out of interest?

Two tracks: code I don't care about where AI can be used and core stuff that I do care about and that needs to be production grade (real time stuff). The core stuff I write myself, the auxiliary stuff is almost all automated. This doesn't get me to 'maximum speed' but it means I keep total control over what I produce and AI can review it, but read only, no changes and it is set up just to flag things, not to suggest particular fixes.

>two tracks .. review

Good one, that seems about right by my read of things.

Review is more important now than ever. My workflow has 3 review stages .. after analysis/specs/design, just prior to starting development (intake), and in the quality stages of testing and so on.

Well, there's also an after-release review, but the sales/marketing guys do that as part of their followups.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com