sandwich on Nostr: I have more 20 years of experience with running software teams, started when I was 13 ...
I have more 20 years of experience with running software teams, started when I was 13 where I took my summer lawnmowing proceeds to hire eastern European developers to build out an app and subsequently advance my knowledge of development via profit producing endeavors (I created a situation where I made money to learn).
I can say without any uncertainty, that given the experience of writing in-depth technical specifications, and an ability to understand when to express low-level and high level requirements, that LLMs expedite development substantially. That doesn't mean they produce great code every time, as you still need to review results and provide useful feedback. Almost always the code requires adjustment. The time savings obtained by having parallel, asynchronous junior devs and architectural consultants at your disposal, for the cost of lunch, cannot be overstated.
There are certain functionalities I have written more times than I can count, and with proper specification LLMs handle these situations extremely well. Within seconds I can tell just by the shape of the code produced whether or not it satiates the requirements. On rare ocassions they have produced a solution I didn't think of myself (obviously the solution their masters stole during training from another developer: to those developers I owe you some sats)
It goes without saying they are susceptible to death spirals in most areas and you're better of square pushing by candelight.
Just as with humans, the seed, or otherwise the initial requirements expressed, can be more important than the skill of the programmer.
I can say without any uncertainty, that given the experience of writing in-depth technical specifications, and an ability to understand when to express low-level and high level requirements, that LLMs expedite development substantially. That doesn't mean they produce great code every time, as you still need to review results and provide useful feedback. Almost always the code requires adjustment. The time savings obtained by having parallel, asynchronous junior devs and architectural consultants at your disposal, for the cost of lunch, cannot be overstated.
There are certain functionalities I have written more times than I can count, and with proper specification LLMs handle these situations extremely well. Within seconds I can tell just by the shape of the code produced whether or not it satiates the requirements. On rare ocassions they have produced a solution I didn't think of myself (obviously the solution their masters stole during training from another developer: to those developers I owe you some sats)
It goes without saying they are susceptible to death spirals in most areas and you're better of square pushing by candelight.
Just as with humans, the seed, or otherwise the initial requirements expressed, can be more important than the skill of the programmer.