196
AI-authored code needs more attention, contains worse bugs
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
196 points (99.0% liked)
Programming
24095 readers
278 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I fully concur with the intern metaphor. That's what an LLM is - an intern with VAST amounts of lexical knowledge but little understanding of large scale system design, or generally, experience.
LLM generated code is mostly okay. You do have to review it, like you would an intern's contributions, but generally, it's good quality code and well documented.
Yeah I don't think we should be pushing to have LLMs generate code unsupervised. It's an unrealistic standard. It's not even a standard most companies would entrust their most capable programmers with. Everything needs to be reviewed.
But just because it's not working alone doesn't mean it's useless. I wrote like 5 lines of code this week by hand. But I committed thousands of lines. And I reviewed and tweaked and tended to every one of them. That's how it should be.