nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqatjgpzlrj4d8krxsnkklrs3rjxtlht47akcatjtumvxq263c05ms5ld2rh (nprofile…d2rh) Our company is very deep into it. And we have got people that argue like that. Ironically I work a lot with these systems as well. But I always perform a manual review of the code before creating the pull request. Also our pull requests are always reviewed by humans.
Especially during the first review, I often see stuff in the code that I really don't like, either from the way it is coded or from an efficiency standpoint or useless complexity.
And concerning the "full test coverage": Just Friday I fixed a bug that one of our human testers found. Before he tested it, I already had some gut feeling that there could be a problem in the code, so I told the tester about it. And my gut feeling was right. So after I fixed the bug, several automatically created tests failed ...
And concerning the tests: I also had situations where the LLM did some coding that was bad, so that already existing tests failed. And what did the LLM: It hadn't fixed the code but changed the test ...
At least in our department we always require human reviews, so I hope that the quality won't suffer.
Michael 🇺🇦
npub1nk…2jt9l
2026-05-16 09:03:26 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…pxl0
Author Public Key
npub1nkyslfu99j26dn76cgmlzfncstjasaulaagyz90daf0r90rnd8gs52jt9lSeen on
wss://relay.ditto.pubPublished at
2026-05-16 09:03:26 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "d67d01e7ecc3057209cbe99d7c52b522c485b66eeafdbe180d38b55a476804ce",
"pubkey": "9d890fa7852c95a6cfdac237f1267882e5d8779fef504115edea5e32bc7369d1",
"created_at": 1778922206,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"eae4808be3955a7b0cd09dadf1c2239197fbaebeedb1d5c97cdb0c056a387d37",
"wss://relay.ditto.pub"
],
[
"p",
"467190b8d58d4ae2be0015ec05e8210d616bfef359d3b658c58fcfb6295ec462",
"wss://relay.ditto.pub"
],
[
"p",
"84437d150630272a780c6214a841077271d73006e61b2987a1587284e3cb99ba",
"wss://relay.ditto.pub"
],
[
"e",
"6c53d00d000d028d74be293cfdb7181e9e4f8a5110f330053e68ee67f26679fd",
"wss://relay.ditto.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://pirati.ca/objects/ec054ce7-206a-0832-dec8-b66402060660",
"activitypub"
],
[
"client",
"Mostr",
"31990:6be38f8c63df7dbf84db7ec4a6e6fbbd8d19dca3b980efad18585c46f04b26f9:mostr",
"wss://relay.ditto.pub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqatjgpzlrj4d8krxsnkklrs3rjxtlht47akcatjtumvxq263c05ms5ld2rh Our company is very deep into it. And we have got people that argue like that. Ironically I work a lot with these systems as well. But I always perform a manual review of the code before creating the pull request. Also our pull requests are always reviewed by humans.\n\nEspecially during the first review, I often see stuff in the code that I really don't like, either from the way it is coded or from an efficiency standpoint or useless complexity.\n\nAnd concerning the \"full test coverage\": Just Friday I fixed a bug that one of our human testers found. Before he tested it, I already had some gut feeling that there could be a problem in the code, so I told the tester about it. And my gut feeling was right. So after I fixed the bug, several automatically created tests failed ...\n\nAnd concerning the tests: I also had situations where the LLM did some coding that was bad, so that already existing tests failed. And what did the LLM: It hadn't fixed the code but changed the test ...\n\nAt least in our department we always require human reviews, so I hope that the quality won't suffer.",
"sig": "d65efdefaca8301856967ce37c8a12e0517271dbdd1cba2370ec31604790d813b32d2901c041459ebf165efccb34278fec8cb660e963474f90f6d7ab2ef415f7"
}