Yeah, same. Others will generate some awful code and get praise for how quickly they implemented a feature. And then I need to debug or modify that awful code at some point and it takes longer than rewriting it.
It just feels so wrong, too. We had the ability to quickly write awful code beforehand, too, and learned over a long time that it’s not worth it. Now we have a different way of doing the same thing and it’s treated like it’s entirely different.
Maybe we can shift to an entirely different paradigm, where we don’t need to understand code anymore, because we always just generate anew or something. But I’d really rather have any evidence of that being a good idea, and not just causing different bugs to be generated, before I risk a project to that.
![The Bureaucracy Trap [Work Chronicles]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!rm0B!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ffe17cfec-68f6-44e0-adaa-04c31bdc5845_4800x4800.png){kind=link}
Yeah, same. Others will generate some awful code and get praise for how quickly they implemented a feature. And then I need to debug or modify that awful code at some point and it takes longer than rewriting it.
It just feels so wrong, too. We had the ability to quickly write awful code beforehand, too, and learned over a long time that it’s not worth it. Now we have a different way of doing the same thing and it’s treated like it’s entirely different.
Maybe we can shift to an entirely different paradigm, where we don’t need to understand code anymore, because we always just generate anew or something. But I’d really rather have any evidence of that being a good idea, and not just causing different bugs to be generated, before I risk a project to that.
Well said. This whole hype cycle has been weird.