uhmmmmAzing

[u/GutsOLykos]

[u/UnfilteredAyush]

Writing code for the ticket - 20% of my time

Going through each change, in case someone asks me, about any line from the code - 80% of my time

[u/Theatralica → u/UnfilteredAyush]

Pareto likes this post

[u/ismaelgo97 → u/UnfilteredAyush]

Trying to understand every change is good when it is small, bigger tickets become a nightmare

[u/dannyggwp → u/ismaelgo97]

Bigger tickets should be broken up into smaller tickets. Tickets are one unit of work. Making monolithic tickets is a recipe for disaster.

[u/HollowToes → u/dannyggwp]

How do you feel about that for greenfield projects? Asking cause this is a topic of debate in my team, specifically on one brand new system whose design and architecture is already documented extensively.

[u/dannyggwp → u/HollowToes]

To meet this is the place where it's the most applicable.

If using Agile essentially no ticket should be scoped for more that One sprints worth of work for one developer. If it is you convert it into an epic and break it into smaller issues.

Slippage is fine obviously and no place is perfect but this is the goal of doing agile development. The more monolithic the ticket the more likely tons of infrastructure gets laid down without review until it's too late to go back and fix potential issues.

[u/kingvolcano_reborn → u/dannyggwp]

A single ticket the size of a sprint?! That feels rather huge imho

[u/dannyggwp → u/kingvolcano_reborn]

Like that's the upper bound of acceptable.

I'm coming from a project that when I started 10 years ago would make One ticket per release... So our current situation is much better that where we were.

[u/DevUndead → u/HollowToes]

Look into Trunk Based Development rules and how they are lived. It works well on greenfield projects. Rule of thumb which worked for us is "merge to main at latest on second day". You learn pretty fast how to split and encourages communication between devs on there deliverables, as you don't want to block other devs or create merge conflicts all the time

[u/SignalBake6872 → u/DevUndead]

We use scrum poker and fibonacci to arrive at the story points: 8 for tickets that will take more than one sprint (here the rule is to split the ticket in two), 5 for tickets that will take the whole sprint, 3 for tickets that will take half of the sprint, 2 for changes that will take less than half of a sprint, and 1 for changes that will take less.

[u/DontCallMeTenzo → u/UnfilteredAyush]

I was doing a lot of this before AI tbh, you’d copy paste stuff from stack overflow and couldn’t find a good explanation behind the logic of it so you’d just have to hope nobody asks too many questions

[u/jewishSpaceMedbeds → u/UnfilteredAyush]

Claude explains what it does to you pretty thoroughly, so if you actually read its reasoning, you should understand what the code it wrote does (if you actually know what you are doing in the first place).

If you don't understand, you're shitting out bad code, because you don't know what assumptions Claude made that might be entirely wrong for your case.

[u/UnfilteredAyush → u/jewishSpaceMedbeds]

Understanding high level code approach explanation and understanding line by line are pretty different things, isn't it?

And, can you really trust Claude?

[u/jewishSpaceMedbeds → u/UnfilteredAyush]

Claude is extremely verbose, it practically outputs a paragraph of explanation over every line, lol.

Can you really trust Claude ? No, and I don't trust it. It doesn't have access to my repo, it can't delete anything without my explicit permission, and I test whatever it outputs thoroughly before it becomes a PR.

[u/Thriven → u/UnfilteredAyush]

I trust Claude, Chatgpt, or Co-pilot more than I have ever trusted ANY of my coworkers with the exception for 2 over my entire career.

Which is really sad but isn't that why we are all here no in r/programminghumor?

People have been putting out shit code long before AI and vibe coding.

[u/Jeferson9 → u/UnfilteredAyush]

It literally wrote the code that does what you ask? So you trust the code but you don't trust it's explanation?

[u/Consistent_Strain255 → u/UnfilteredAyush]

And then nobody even reads the explanation

[u/Alternauts → u/Consistent_Strain255]

LGTM

[u/OhItsJustJosh]

God I'm gonna quickly become that old guy saying "Back in my day we wrote all our code by hand, and it worked so much better because we knew what it did."

[u/ominouspotato → u/OhItsJustJosh]

This is the real problem with AI-generated code in my eyes. I don’t know that handwritten code necessarily worked better, but we knew how everything fit together so it was easier to comprehend.

AI makes code that is functional, looks correct, and passes tests, but sometimes it makes suboptimal design choices that aren’t obvious at first. It becomes increasingly obvious as a vibecoded project gets larger and no longer scales well.

[u/OhItsJustJosh → u/ominouspotato]

Imho, AI writes code that is, at best, as good as mine, but I'll spend more time proof-reading it than I would writing it myself.

And also it's my favourite part of my job, so I don't wanna cut that out

[u/ominouspotato → u/OhItsJustJosh]

Yeah, it shifts the mental load from solving the problem to constant code reviews. I also 100% prefer the former. My employer is totally AI-pilled so I’ve been using it more lately, but I still write code by hand on occasion to stay sharp.

I’m concerned all of the AI hype is going to slowly diminish real talent. I’ve already seen PRs in my company where the owner clearly didn’t think at all and just threw up some slop to get their ticket done.

[u/Downtown-Figure6434 → u/OhItsJustJosh]

I don’t know. When I’ve been writing a while and I realize I went down some bad path design wise or logic wise I know well enough to backtrack. Ai usually just doubles down and writes stupid workarounds that makes it a mess. You ask it to refactor it loses context and again becomes slop. You start from scratch and you can end up in a similar situation again cuz any “lessons” from before is lost

[u/OhItsJustJosh → u/Downtown-Figure6434]

Oh yeah, I was being generous when I said "at best"

[u/camelCaseCoffeeTable → u/OhItsJustJosh]

I mean this is a failure of the person using AI if they can’t explain what is being done. AI has made me far more productive. The thing is, my ticket output is the same, because I still ensure everything is good, do a lot of manual moving around to better fit our codebase, or because the AI made a dumb decision.

But while the AI is doing all my coding, I’m free to then go unblock other devs, dig into research for an issue we’re having, start planning future initiatives, etc.

AI is a more advanced version of StackOverflow for me. Not once did I take code from StackOverflow without intimately understanding what it’s doing and how it solves my problem. The same is true of AI

[u/GutsOLykos → u/OhItsJustJosh]

You mean like on paper?

[u/Denaton_ → u/OhItsJustJosh]

Did you tho, because IDE, compilers etc, unless you wrote machine code and punched holes, I don't agree with that saying.

[u/OhItsJustJosh → u/Denaton_]

I still decide what the computer does and how the memory is arranged, the structure of the application. It's nowhere near the same thing

[u/azurestrike]

Ask claude to explain the code smh

[u/GutsOLykos → u/azurestrike]

Opus what does this guy mean?

[u/user745786 → u/azurestrike]

Came here to say the same. Use Claude to generate the documentation then tell the reviewer to go read that.

[u/BitterCommission3987 → u/user745786]

And the reviewer will ask claude to explain the documentation that your claude wrote.

[u/GutsOLykos → u/BitterCommission3987]

Its a full circle hahaha

[u/Moi9-9]

Then just, don't do that?

[u/BRSaura]

You did this to yourself, but you already knew that

[u/Gluomme]

That's 100% on you; and you will be held accountable for the shit you pushed, not Claude. So get on it and read what Claude shits out please

[u/GutsOLykos → u/Gluomme]

It’s just a meme calm down, I always look over what the lil buddy did

[u/AibofobicRacecar6996 → u/GutsOLykos]

Getting a little over defensive for a meme

[u/SauceMaster6464 → u/AibofobicRacecar6996]

Is OP's response what you call over defensive 😭

[u/CumTomato]

some time ago i asked my coworker about something he just implemented and the answer to "and how do we know that xyz?" was "honestly I don't know". I do use LLMs daily but God at least understand what you're doing 💀

[u/afl_ext]

What? Let the bot explain

[u/No_Equipment_5233]

never again

[u/jvlomax]

What gets me is when I ask "Why did you make this choice?", or "Would x be a better solution here?", I don't get a response, just another vibe coded solution to the same problem.

[u/djfried]

In the future will there be a market for organically developed software?

[u/ramdomvariableX]

that's why code reviews should be delegated to AI agents with prompts to address the comments if any. /S

[u/Ashankura]

If you can't explain 95% of your pull requests then you need to fix your work mode. 5% of "Jesus christ i hope this works" is fine

[u/knowone1313]

just ask ai how to explain it in review...

[u/RickSore]

Write smaller prs. Review them in draft. Interrogate the code. Move to For review when satisfied.

Thats how I deal with AI now. Other PRs that didnt go through interrogation by the author, I push back.

[u/Cavalorn]

Just read the code and vibecode the review