The conversation

Lessons learnedExperience excerpt · English

Because most of my career has been spent as an on-site programmer

… Because most of my career has been spent as an on-site programmer. Staying at factories, visiting public institutions, deploying services for financial companies. My career is short, but I was lucky enough to work in various places. When AI first came out, I thought I still wrote better code. But after the GPT 5 series, I've completely switched to AI and I'm now thinking about how to avoid errors and maintain larger codebases. In the world I work in, it's common to see functions with 10,000 lines. Many people don't consider coupling or cohesion. So these days, instead of focusing on programming syntax, I'm studying programming theory and thinking about how to handle code when it becomes massive and turns into a black box through vibe coding. And I think this approach is right, because I believe I need to get used to using AI, so I keep coding with it. But due to my cognitive limits, I've restricted myself to C# and TypeScript, which I'm comfortable with. C++ has too much to memorize and is hard to keep up with. …

Original discussionThe Tower Keeps Rising269 source comments · at import
2

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 2

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

AR

Indeed. This is an awkward era where we're using these artificial language tools to target abstractions made for humans to manually write. At some point the path from human language to machine code is not going to require an interstitial step writing to higher level languages as we know them.

Full original
SL

For a lot of people, LLM's are actually doing a better job than what they are capable of. I do worry that they are the people first up for replacement, since they don't really provide much value that the LLM itself can't provide. There isn't much point in paying a human to prompt an LLM if you could do it yourself, the value is in someone with the skill and judgement to both prompt it correctly and validate the output - and if the LLM is producing better code than the human is capable of they clearly don't have any of that. Personally I really like using LLMs because they have made certain things a lot more productive, but I don't feel like my job has really changed at all. I have a new way of generating code, but my value has never been my (abysmal) typing speed or knowledge of algorithms or how fast I can centre a div. It's been in the stuff that LLMs still haven't pierced, and probabl…

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.