As someone whose job description has expanded to include: "Prepare offers for specialized IT systems including server hardware", I have this to say:
-
A human _software developer_ (not a "programmer") can think about the process, and analyze what went wrong.
An LLM, by definition, cannot "think". There won't be any lessons learned, and no institutional knowledge.
@juergen_hubert The developer isn't really replaced by the LLMs yet. The programmer absolutely is.
-
@juergen_hubert The bubble might not burst, though, because it's not a bubble. Coding with coding agents based on LLMs is just so much faster that there will be no going back.
Ingo Heinscher That is not what the developers I've worked with are saying. Lines of code can be produced faster than ever, but software engineering isn't about the number of lines of code produced, but about what those lines do.
-
Ingo Heinscher That is not what the developers I've worked with are saying. Lines of code can be produced faster than ever, but software engineering isn't about the number of lines of code produced, but about what those lines do.
@kichae I see no contradiction to what I wrote. Coding agents are so far a massive productivity increase, not more, not less. But that's not a bubble. That's progress.
-
@juergen_hubert The developer isn't really replaced by the LLMs yet. The programmer absolutely is.
And how many IT companies still employ "programmers" as opposed to software developers?
-
And how many IT companies still employ "programmers" as opposed to software developers?
@juergen_hubert I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Do you believe coding agents are a productivity leap, or do you not?
-
@juergen_hubert I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Do you believe coding agents are a productivity leap, or do you not?
They might be a productivity leap for small, fairly standardized, self-contained projects, but their usefulness decreased geometrically with project complexity.
-
They might be a productivity leap for small, fairly standardized, self-contained projects, but their usefulness decreased geometrically with project complexity.
@juergen_hubert Now you are grasping for straws.
This technology is phenomenal and very useful. Now, not every use is maybe a wise allocation of resources. The talk of a "bubble" might be about some of the companies, but the AI technology itself is clearly extremely useful even in its present, rather early stage. -
@juergen_hubert Now you are grasping for straws.
This technology is phenomenal and very useful. Now, not every use is maybe a wise allocation of resources. The talk of a "bubble" might be about some of the companies, but the AI technology itself is clearly extremely useful even in its present, rather early stage.@juergen_hubert That said: Hardware prices will go down again as scientists figure out more efficient ways to implement AI, and hardware better suited to the tasks becomes widely available.
-
@juergen_hubert Now you are grasping for straws.
This technology is phenomenal and very useful. Now, not every use is maybe a wise allocation of resources. The talk of a "bubble" might be about some of the companies, but the AI technology itself is clearly extremely useful even in its present, rather early stage.Are there any scientific papers that quantify how useful they are in actual software development practice?
-
Are there any scientific papers that quantify how useful they are in actual software development practice?
@juergen_hubert Claude Code is just one year old, I doubt anyone decided to write papers about it. But you hear from everywhere how they are no longer coding themselves, but using LLM's for coding.
So do I.
-
@juergen_hubert Claude Code is just one year old, I doubt anyone decided to write papers about it. But you hear from everywhere how they are no longer coding themselves, but using LLM's for coding.
So do I.
So no one has yet any experience whether it is viable for large, complex, and long-term software projects, either.
