Cut through the breathless hype and figure out whether the new framework with a weird name actually addresses coding agent's fundamental limitations - bad context, and a mediocre sense of software design. Hint: if the solution involves adding more LLMs, you might want to proceed with caution.

Without human feedback, LLMs tend to write software like an early-career engineer - code that solves the immediate problem but tends to accumulate “design debt” over time, leading to software that’s becomes brittle and buggy.

  • KissakiEnglish
    2·
    1 hour ago

    and figure out whether the new framework with a weird name actually addresses

    Couldn’t name what this is about in the title, nor in the teaser, I guess?

    “Latest hotness” and “the new framework with a new name” isn’t very discerning.

  • MagicShel@lemmy.zipEnglish
    6·
    2 hours ago

    Without human feedback

    I’ve identified the problem.

    code that solves the immediate problem but tends to accumulate “design debt” over time

    If by immediate you mean “this prompt” and by over time you mean “fifteen minutes from now,” yes. AI requires human input to build anything durable or valuable.

    The problem isn’t in the coding, but the understanding of the context coding happens in. Code has to be secure. It has to be maintainable. It has to be extensible. It has to solve a business need. It generally should contribute to the long-term vision. It exists within an environment of competing and cross-cutting interests. It has to align with priorities.

    Writing code is a very human endeavor. Solving one business need with 1k lines of code is easy. Doing it within an enterprise that exists beyond just that one need is not.