Developers propose restricting LLM code contributions rather than reviews
3 Sep 21 9:32 AM · 5d ago · 5 comments · 1 source · development 3 of 4
In response, some engineers argue the only sustainable solution is to ban or severely limit LLM code contributions, rather than trying to automate reviews to keep pace. One commenter states that code review can only work if humans are reviewing human-written code, and suggests hiring more senior reviewers instead.
“the only way to do this is ban LLM code contributions. Their output simply outscales any review process.”
torsten_devPostHog Developer tools companypopzxc Software engineer and criticPaul D'Ambra PostHog engineer
The whole story postscomments the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump
What people said 5 voices · verbatim
-
I've said it many times, look back to music at the turn of the century (feels weird to use that term about something I was already in my 30s for.) There are so many parallels. The sudden influx of ever more powerful digital audio manipulation tools vastly speeded up the production of music. But it didn't magically create a lot more great…
-
I can feel that. In my teams, likely, there is a consensus that LLMs are meant to improve quality more than velocity. And maintaining it this way is certainly a process: we have built a culture of discussing news, approaches, etc in _both_ ways -- if something looks cool, we might try it or someone can even explain their experience to everyone; if…
-
developers to review as little code as possible AI companies don't want to hear this, but the only way to do this is ban LLM code contributions. Their output simply outscales any review process. You're correct that the code review is essential so that someone else can own the code. Static analysis, cursory code review, grep on steroids, whatever…
-
Wait you think PR reviews are a problem that’s solved by writing code by hand no. i think the problems caused by AI written code that people think can be solved at PR review time are solved by writing the code by hand. You’ve never dealt with devs who put out atrocious 1k line PR of course I have and now this problem is twice as bad . i think…
-
Manual lathes -> CNCs, custom assemblies -> Ford Model Ts, there's a dozen other examples of automation where quality matters more than most software, and automation changed the whole process. We are not unique Except we are unique. Copying software is costless. Copying a model T costs a lot. Try understanding the limits of a metaphor before…
All 4 developments of Debate flares over AI code review automation: bottleneck or… →
RedditHacker News