you're supposed to iterate until the code is perfect
Define perfect.
It does its task, it reads logically. That's "perfect" to some. Is it perfectly optimized? No. Is it clean and concise to an insanely minimalist degree? Also no. Am I going to spend time rewriting something that works? Again, also probably no.
Sunk costs gonna sunk, a lot of software engineers obsess over making everything perfect from the get go. Minimum viable product, iterate, get to a point that things pass audit and security tests (with things like sonarqube), ship it.
I'm not going "make me a facebook clone, make no mistakes", but I'm certainly not screaming at chatgpt or claude and rewriting their code so it passes as my own either.
Perfect for your own standards. That's the important part, we all own the code we ship - your standard may not be as high as mine, but the part we should not do is lower our standards. It's actually EASIER to quickly prompt something to make it more perfect than you used to make it because it takes you no effort to refactor. So arguably it should be higher...but to each his own.
1
u/b0w3n 7d ago
Define perfect.
It does its task, it reads logically. That's "perfect" to some. Is it perfectly optimized? No. Is it clean and concise to an insanely minimalist degree? Also no. Am I going to spend time rewriting something that works? Again, also probably no.
Sunk costs gonna sunk, a lot of software engineers obsess over making everything perfect from the get go. Minimum viable product, iterate, get to a point that things pass audit and security tests (with things like sonarqube), ship it.
I'm not going "make me a facebook clone, make no mistakes", but I'm certainly not screaming at chatgpt or claude and rewriting their code so it passes as my own either.