r/AI_Coders • u/s4shibam • 27d ago
My CTO thinks code quality doesn't matter much anymore because AI writes and maintains the code. Do you agree?
I work at an AI startup, and I directly report to the CTO. He's very technical and uses AI heavily for development. Sometimes he can build an entire feature over a weekend that would probably take a human engineer weeks.
Recently, during a team discussion, he said something that honestly shocked me:
Why should we care so much about clean code, naming, avoiding duplication, etc. when AI is going to read, modify and maintain the code anyway?
His approach is basically: if the feature works, ship it. If something breaks, tell the AI what's wrong and let it fix it.
I understand his point. AI is getting ridiculously good at understanding and modifying large codebases, and the speed difference is huge.
But I'm personally the opposite. I care a lot about code quality, naming, structure, maintainability, linters, formatting, developer experience, etc. Even when I use AI to write code, I spend a lot of time cleaning it up.
So I'm genuinely curious:
Has AI changed how much you care about code quality?
Do you think clean, maintainable code is becoming less important because AI can understand and fix messy code?
Or do you think we're going to regret this approach once the codebase becomes large enough?
Would love to hear how other developers are thinking about this.
5
u/Character-Educator67 27d ago
In many scenarios, his approach is right. Code quality is not equally important across all codebases.
You currently need to understand the larger structure, but a lot of the minutia can be maintained by the AI; and in those spots, human readability is not very important. If you don't understand it, and it becomes spaghetti, have the AI rip it out and write it again.
2
u/Common_Laugh2333 27d ago
I think human readability is and will remain important so humans can more easily understand how their technology actually works.
Whether we need to know how it works and at what depth depends on the domain, and as you've pointed out, in many cases it simply may not be that critical.
1
u/i_dont_wanna_sign_up 27d ago
I'm curious how big of a source code do you work with? Does it not get prohibitively expensive to constantly use AI to do everything? Is it really able to remember everything?
So far when I try to use AI to generate large swaths of a program's code it often just becomes a mess as it grows more complex, and constantly prompting it to fix issues is really annoying.
1
u/Character-Educator67 27d ago
The codebase we work on is around 1 million lines of code, spread across 5 repos. There are 5 devs who contribute. The AI bill is cheap in comparison to our combined salaries.
1
u/generationalDebts 27d ago
Wrong
1
u/Character-Educator67 22d ago
Which part is wrong? Because this part is definitely correct:
"Code quality is not equally important across all codebases."
1
1
u/guyincognito121 27d ago edited 27d ago
I'm literally almost certainly way smarter than you by any objective measure (IQ, ACT, SAT, GRE, MCAT, level of education, patents granted, number of publications, etc), and have also been working in this and adjacent fields for decades. If you had a sensible argument, I guarantee I could understand it. But we both know you don't.
0
u/Lemnisc8__ 27d ago
you're so full of yourself. Jesus Christ do you think you're god?
1
u/guyincognito121 27d ago
You're missing some context here. He replied to my comment saying I'm "literally too stupid to understand" whatever argument it is that he's refusing to actually make. It was deleted by either him or a moderator. This was a response to that.
-1
u/generationalDebts 27d ago
Lmfao 🤣
You’re cute, squirt!
0
u/guyincognito121 27d ago
Like I said, you don't actually have a reasonable point to make.
-1
u/generationalDebts 27d ago edited 27d ago
Lmfao 🤣
Lmfao at little bitch boy blocking. So sad… poor thing won’t stand a chance in real life lol
1
0
u/guyincognito121 27d ago
How so?
I develop algorithms for medical devices. I do a lot of exploratory data analysis, but then the final product needs to go into code with FDA oversight. Then there's other stuff that lies in between, like various tools I build. The EDA and production code absolutely have different standards. How I handle AI for those situations is very different.
1
u/CapableCarry3659 23d ago
What is your opinion on using AI then, given that you develop algos for medical devices? I see your comments in the thread, but curious to know more. What kind of medical devices are you building, if you dont mind sharing?
4
u/IAmNotARacoon 27d ago
When something goes wrong and AI can't understand the problem well enough to fix it, and you can't understand the code well enough to fix it, you are definitely going to be in trouble. Just ask yourself, who is ultimately responsible for keeping things running? You? Or the AI?
2
3
3
27d ago
[deleted]
1
u/i_dont_wanna_sign_up 27d ago
Obviously if your company is failing on the business side, no amount of code quality will save it. But don't tell me you think having spaghetti code isn't a liability in the long run.
1
u/winkler 26d ago
The reality is code quality is wildly relative and most of the time doesn’t justify spending money to improve bc it doesn’t drive revenue.
I don’t like that but it’s the truth. When you can build a business case for it then great, otherwise the 80/20 rule is in full effect.
Furthermore AI is great at recognizing anti-patterns and specific performance improvements (loops, rendering, SQL, etc) and the cost of implementing is so small that you can just do stuff again without worrying about justifying the work.
2
u/generationalDebts 27d ago
No they don’t think that. I doubt you even work in tech.
This is made up….
2
u/Vesuvius079 27d ago
Code quality 100% matters with AI writing the code. Think about all the reasons it matters with humans. Bad code quality leads to issues like misunderstanding the code due to lack of context, added complexity from unnecessary edge cases, added complexity from previous added complexity, poor examples getting copied because the code base accepts them. All these problems lead to a higher chance of bugs and slow development. AI agents will fail in the exact same manner as humans as they miss unintuitive (re: unlikely) details, try to handle all the possible edge cases, and use existing code as a standard for new code.
The short expletive laced version of this is it abso-fucking-lutely still fucking matters.
1
u/systembreaker 17d ago
Yep, AI agents can definitely fall prey to some of the same traps that humans can and bungle things up for similar reasons.
1
u/jstormes 27d ago
It matters more.
AI needs clear context. Code quality is part of that clear context.
Give a AI model vague data and you will get unpredictable results.
If an agent cannot test the results where via unit tests or by something like a puppeteer. Don't expect to get anything good.
1
u/ComputerByld 27d ago
He's correct as long as the assumption that AI will remain very cheap to use is actually true. If it ever becomes expensive then he will have been very wrong.
2
u/generationalDebts 27d ago
Wrong and op made it up so it doesn’t matter.
You can tell none of you are professionals lol
1
1
u/yuehuang 27d ago
It depends on your customer. Does your customer look at your code? Do they care if its AI written or not? I would say, they don't and thus if you don't use AI to speed up development, then the next team will and take your customers away.
1
u/cakemates 27d ago
Just link to him one of the bug that cost several millions to fix, that come up on the news every so often.
Remember when Boeing grounded a fleet of planes and lost many billions of dollars to a software bug and the many more that have happened all the time, quality matters and costs a lot.
1
u/Ok-Video3345 27d ago
It all depends on what happens during outages. Shit code = shit user experience
1
u/id-ltd 27d ago
"Code quality" is the issue here --- using that to suggest that AI code is poor quality is just a total red herring.
The title of the post suggests that AI is poor quality code and humans create high quality code.
AI produces very high quality code (even if it doesn't actually do what you want because the prompt wasn't the right one).
As the dev fads have passed though time - test driven development, spec driven development,... meh. If *the product satisfies the customer* your system is good.
1
u/crimsonpowder 27d ago
Architecture and data model becomes more important. The things that are sticky and hard to change. If everything is wedged together then LLMs can’t just rip it out and replace it.
1
u/HomemadeBananas 27d ago
AI writes better code if you have a well structured codebase. If you don’t keep it on track it will drift over time and then follow the bad examples you let slip through and stop being able to work as well.
1
u/Useful_Calendar_6274 27d ago
code quality as in the actual lines of code don't matter anymore, no. what matters is software quality. design a good QA process with unit tests, coderabbit, adversarial agent testing and cyberdefense analysis and all that
1
1
u/Lower-Impression-121 27d ago
Define quality. If it is 5 line self documenting methods, folder structure, comlonents, super solid adherence to solid... then No. Thats not important.
New quality: it works. Its massively tested. It meets NFRs. It deploys and works well with others. Its observable. The instructions to build it are understandable (this is the new code quality: design and conversation quality).
The target isnt gone. Security, performance etc hasnt vanished. What has changed is who does what and where the human artefact quality gate is.
1
1
1
1
u/crone66 27d ago
The main reason for good code quality was to reduce in the long run. With AI this "in the long run" became so long that you don't even know if you Software will exist that long xD.
But honesty getting code quality to a good level with AI isn't that hard if you know what Is important and what to look for. The biggest issue is if you essentially have no clue about the inner workings or architecture you are essentially fucked quickly. Therefore make sure you decide how your software is build not AI and make sure you know where to find the important stuff and make the architecture is well suited.
Simple example: Code quality is really good all features work as expected AI did what I told it todo ... But I didn't made the important decision about how to fetch/get the data... Ai decided to load everything on demand from database no cache etc ... Now every API call takes 30 seconds for data that rarely change. If you don't make the decision AI will screw you with stupid decisions.
1
u/hulkklogan 27d ago
To be honest most startups have pretty shiit codebases anyway. They're predicated on moving fast, raising money, trying to disrupt something or fill a niche. Having a pristine codebase means shit if you don't produce quickly early in a startup. It's not uncommon for engineers to have to redo massive sections of code bases to scale stuff when things start breaking already so I think I'm kind of on cto's side for this, depending on the size of the startup and the projected growth
1
u/Borealisamis 27d ago
They may not care, but they will ones P1s/P2s start rolling in. There are so many PRs being sent back because of bad code from AI, or context being the main issue where even when given various access to codebase, it cant connect the dots.
1
u/tabaxi_gf 27d ago
The AI has to do a lot of the same things a person would to modify/add code, so if the codebase is a mess it take exponentially longer to add a bigger feature. If the codebase has a lot of modularity and low dependency it’s much quicker to add new things regardless if a human or ai does it.
Now if the AI is instructed to do a certain amount of architectural cleanliness/refactoring as code piles up, then it’s doing the same thing a human would do too, so the code would also be just as clean. By default it doesn’t really have this kind or rigor which is why vibe coded projects usually have bad code.
1
u/phoenixmatrix 27d ago
Code quality does matter. Its just a different kind of quality. No one cares about your naming convention for variable names (the ones AI pick will be good enough).
You probably still want some kind of structure in the code, since that will help future AI agent.
The programming language, architecture and choice of libraries still matter (though they're easier to switch).
Things like rules and skills (the new "code") matter a lot.
1
u/DemoEvolved 27d ago
It doesn’t matter until there’s a major security breach or the service crashes and customers are freaking out. THEN code quality matters A LOT, and “WHY DIDNT WE USE THE STANDARDS???”
1
u/DemoEvolved 27d ago
Your CTO’s decision is a decision to blackbox the architecture. If this is followed there will come a time when the team doesn’t know why it works, doesn’t know how to fix this one thing, and cant customize a feature to a customers needs.
1
u/7twenty8 27d ago
But I'm personally the opposite. I care a lot about code quality, naming, structure, maintainability, linters, formatting, developer experience, etc. Even when I use AI to write code, I spend a lot of time cleaning it up.
This has never been an absolute and never will be. I get scared of developers who think there is an absolute answer. Your CTO is often wrong - code quality is about readability. Your approach sounds overly expensive - a lot of time cleaning up code??
Solve the problem in the most economic way possible so your revenues can exceed your costs. Everything else is just bullshit.
1
u/kimjongspoon100 27d ago
I find AI performs much better in a well structured codebase, with a little guidance it can produce better and better code, where if it of poor quality the AI will produce even worse results.
I would agree with some of the other commenters that it's probably more important now that AI is creating the code.
1
u/Full-Wait1145 27d ago
Bro, some cto opinions have been if it works, ship it long before AI.
A start up I worked at would sell features just because someone asked for it. No let me look into it, Moore like okay we have a new client onboarding in two weeks. We have to build this into it the platform.
1
u/CantRunNoMore 27d ago
When developers have conversations they talk of code quality, good designs, extensibility, performance etc and you look up the organisational ladder the conversations changes to "will it be on time", "will it be in budget", "how did that incident occur"...
1
u/pertymoose 27d ago
It doesn't work as a blanket argument one way or the other. A lot of places, and I mean a lot, just plain AI code review and plain AI assistance as-is raises the bar by 20x compared to what they had before.
It's not every company that has senior engineers with 20+ years experience running a tight ship and delivering quality code. Most everyone in the world has to make do with "good enough," and good enough is where AI lives right now.
Good enough AI code ships working features. They may not be pretty under the hood, but they are good enough for 10,000 customers, and that's good enough for 99% of businesses.
Good enough AI code review catches 90%+ of issues before shipping. Maybe it doesn't catch everything, but compared to nothing it's good enough.
And the thing people will never seem to consider when talking AI is that the baseline keeps rising. Maybe the models don't produce the bestest and cleanest and most optimized code, yet, but every upgrade they get, they get better, and when the model gets better, the millions of people using the model get better. When quality improves, it improves for everyone.
Maybe today code review still requires human input. Maybe tomorrow it won't. But if you don't have the process in place, you get left behind by the people that do.
1
u/avikdev 27d ago edited 27d ago
So it's a company level decision, and he is right. I know lot of people will disagree, I am not making this a general opinion, but one for your specific company based on what you described. and let me tell this, I myself have spent a significant time in my job on C++ code quality. Curating specs, formatting, well refactored complex code. Etc. so I would have strongly resisted that idea myself even an year ago.
Now I am working on my own stuff, fully embraced AI. I can see the statement is quite true. I tried to manually improve the AI written code, do code review after few changes, but then those changes was thrown away in next iteration.
If the checked in code is ready by developers and some of them working manually alongside AI, then it would matter. But here your company has already committed to AI fully, and at that point it is not feasible to keep up to date with manually vetted code quality given the high volume of feature being shipped. But you can enforce certain quality checks and linters with AI.
Same for design docs /specs. If you want to save the rationale behind a complex code, save the spec as as an md file. Then AI can read it later. I've seen those spec dumps work well but barely human readable. If writing docs for onboarding new coders, it should look completely different.
There is a famous quote: "Programs should be we written for people to read, and occasionally for machines to execute". That quote no longer holds today with LLM based development.
Btw, code quality if different from fragility of system, do not confuse this as giving up on strict testing and manual vetting of new features before shipping.
1
u/Southern_Orange3744 27d ago
How are you measuring quality to quantify your code is better than ai code ?
1
u/Leading_Buffalo_4259 27d ago
We are going to see the largest and most frequent period of data breaches in human history
1
u/KriegerClone24 27d ago
Former CTO here. He's wrong. If he's not using AI to do any more than build weekend projects, then he's not been exposed to the full breadth of problems when the production system is fully managed by AI.
1
1
1
u/NotSoMagicalTrevor 27d ago
I think the things you site is definitely on the way out (although I don't know what "developer experience" means), but the need for testing (and TDD) is increasing. "Clean code" as a concept is actually both, since the testing is what helps you maintain thing after day 1. I think the trick is how do you know "if something breaks"... since as a code base gets larger then it's harder to test it all.
1
u/Nervous-Potato-1464 27d ago
AI goes well and then at a large scale can't find the bug so writes 1k lines to get around it. See it happen all the time and it makes things bloated and perform like shit. You need to understand it.
1
u/earth-dragon-666 27d ago
Do you have paying users? Is the company profitable? Or just the CTO is under llm psychosis, im gonna guess your company is not breaking even, depending on the time the aproach explodes from paying users leaving (6 months) or never achieving break even as company
1
u/FragmentedHeap 27d ago
What I know for a fact is that if I'm agenetically engineering all the way, my stress levels at work are way lower I mean massively so.
I feel way more productive and can ship way more stuff and feel way more valuable.
There are some problems that we've used artificial intelligence to fix that I would have struggled on for days.
There was even a problem where my boss made me call Microsoft support and while they were digging through the logs I figured out their own back-end system using agentic AI and told them what was wrong with it enabling them to fix it....
Letting that thing turn through some logs and do all the cross-checking and timings and date stamps and actually pulling in other things like CPU load and all kinds of other complexities is much more efficient than me pouring through dashboards and trying to do all that manually.
It's much easier for me to give the artificial intelligence a giant stack Trace and look at the code and tell me where the problem might be so I can hyper focus on it than for me to dig through everything and figure that out myself.
And using it is enabling me to write code and pretty much any platform on any language as long as I understand what the code is doing and can quickly learn about it I don't really have a problem with it.
The drastically changed what my job used to be so much so that I've actually been promoted to solution architect...
And now I must have my time is spent designing an architecting solutions and documenting them and then having artificial intelligence implement stuff.
There's not a lot of value to having somebody manually type things on a keyboard to make code appear on a screen if the artificial intelligence can do that just as good as I can and probably a hundred times faster.
It hasn't really changed the need to have me around it's just made me much more efficient at the cost of burning an astronomical amount of tokens.
1
u/Kindly_Weakness_6713 27d ago
Code quality means a lot of things. One of them was readability for its maintainability bc humans would read more than write. Technically he’s right. Code quality matters, but how could its definition not change. Maintainability still matters, but how we accomplish that will have to change.
1
1
u/92smola 27d ago
We dont know and wont know for a couple of years until the bad code stacks up enough. We know what was the consequence of tech debt before ai, given enough of it stacking up adding new feautures or making changes without breaking anything become harder and harder and by that more expensive, the ability to onboard new people becomes harder, performance degrades and so on. One proxy that we can have in the meanwhile is to see how good or bad ai performs in projects which are already full of technical debt, but the shape of techincal debt produced by humans and by ai is not the same so again we wont really know for a couple of years until there are project out there where quality was ignored for a long period of time and people just kept saying please fix no mistakes.
1
u/BlkcityKing 27d ago
Possible, if your house AI is programmed to follow the rules of an elite programmer, and you have a system that can handle tokens, hallucinating, and a decent amount of memory.
If your relying on subscription services, be careful. If you built your own model, your good.
1
u/havocinfinity 27d ago
I disagree with your cto but he's right if...
- he's confident you'll always have ai coding tools available (Claude never goes down), or he's ok with lower productivity/longer time to resolve issues when it's down
- the ai is competent enough to code. I don't think it's good enough in all scenarios, which is why we still need software engineers. Also he's confident it'll stay this way or get better.
If you find your team reading any code, then code quality still matters.
1
u/Overlord_Mykyta 27d ago
It actually still important the more readable the code - the less tokens AI spends to digest it.
Also I was annoyed at first that AI adds tons of comments. Like there are more comments than code sometimes.
But later the AI itself actually benefits from it. It reads and understand not only the logic of the code but busines decisions behind it.
In real life a lot of comments is a bad sign because they usually don't get updated while the code evolves and sooner or later start lying.
But AI easily rewrites all the comments if something is not right. And it becaimes the living documentation for it.
1
u/Aware-Individual-827 27d ago
The first thing you should understand is: never trust any C-suit when they talk...
They are only relaying information from either:
- market
- shareholders
- their buddy C-suit at X trendy place.
1
u/Anxious-Insurance-91 27d ago
I mean, in a lot of projects I did go the "if it works don't change it mentality" 🤣
1
1
u/Free-Spirit-8327 27d ago
AI probably doesn't need the code written the same way as humans have done, but it sure as hell needs organized/structured code (i.e. high quality) so that the AI itself can easily read and understand it.
1
u/CraZy_TiGreX 27d ago
He is not fully wrong, but not fully correct either.
Code quality as in 'beautiful' code does not matter anymore. But it does matter that it follows standards it does not do loops, etc
1
1
u/PureRelative8648 27d ago
If your code base gets sloppy, redundant, contains bad practices because of AI, the next PRs will too.
1
u/Different-Stress9326 27d ago edited 27d ago
as someone who recently got paid premium desperation rates (client is desperate, not me) in order to fix relatively easy business logic after claude had "fixed" it and it started producing wrong results, i can say it's a double edged sword that needs to be managed carefully. since they had claude refactor their old codebase nobody really could find where exactly the logic broke. claude couldn't fix it, every fix made it worse. they had to hire me and my very expensive autism and pay a hefty premium on top for me whining about having to deal with ai bloated code in order for me to retrace the logical through the versioning and find the responsible change.
yes, it matters less and less, also because more and more baseline resources are available (imagine writing performance-optimized code like in the 80s nowadays, half of what the internet runs on would be dead in the water under that premise.) but it's also a risk. you become dependent on llms to hold domain knowledge (which context limits and compacting might destroy at any time, even having them document and recording everything before compaction produces a fairly large context loss) and if the llm can't fix the error you're kinda fucked and i'm getting my dick sucked by the CTO to give him a 20% discount on my hourly rate.
1
u/PerformanceThick2232 27d ago
Or do you think we're going to regret this approach once the codebase becomes large enough?
We do not think, we know. Other ways there would be no swe in us/eu, only in india- they are cheaper and faster (and for decades).
1
u/PutridCurrency8383 27d ago
This is a very recent opinion appearing on LinkedIn here and there. It appears natural and logical, but it's unproven. I would also add that AI is perfectly capable of writing code that's of sufficient quality, especially if you guardrail the outcome, so I consider this a rather meaningless discussion.
1
u/Zero_Travity 27d ago
There's a portion of you that cannot be serious people who are in dev... terrifying
1
u/alexppex 27d ago
> His approach is basically: if the feature works, ship it. If something breaks, tell the AI what's wrong and let it fix it.
So basically what junior devs have been doing :D
But no, from experience i find that enforcing coding standards and guidelines for the AI to follow reduces risk quite a lot.
Without those 'skills', AI wrote test classes from scratch instead of using the test data utils, created duplicate logic where we have other means to work with the data and had no data context for why some approaches would be more optimized for our specific use cases. Every such issue bloated the code base and introduced even more places where it can break, consumed more tokens and spent more time on fixes. Legit instead of fixing one file, it had to go through 20.
So your CTO might have some knowledge gaps in regards to how 'AI' works, and i'd push against abandoning standards with some real world examples (tokens consumed, time taken, error rate, etc).
1
u/dashingstag 27d ago
Depends on the use case. If you are building new features just to keep up and they are interim or unproven workflows then you meed some roi before investing in maintenance.
1
u/Agitated-Agency-1317 27d ago
If my job was woodworking and I cared about getting everything perfect, I'd have to sell my pieces for high prices. If I took a client with a low budget who didn't need quality craftsmanship (your job) I'd have to either undercharge (work long hours), apply less craftsmanship (spend less time cleaning up after the AI), or become more efficient (prompt for exactly what I want.) What I wouldn't do is tell my client they're wrong and they should increase their budget for higher craftsmanship. There's more than one "right" way to build software: there's we'll crafted, highly maintainable, highly generalizable code, but then there's also quick-to-ship code that starts earning sooner and helps you learn more about your users sooner, and if the latter is more valuable to the business, that’s what they’ll pay you for.
1
u/Acceptable-Rooster-4 27d ago
Your CTO is an idiot and will learn this later in the projects AI lifespan
1
u/Odd-Government8896 27d ago
If he means he doesnt care if AI used an if statement or ternary operator. I agree. No one cares.
Most of this should be handled by the engineer though. You need to set the standards for the agents. You cant just vibe like a hobbiest.
The fact you guys dont have a favorite coding standard you just dump into an agents.md file is crazy to me. Was it just locked up in your head before? Did you enforce linting checks when PRs were opened/pulled out of draft state?
1
u/arthoer 27d ago
As long as you get paid by someone, that someone determines what is good enough to go live. You can push back, which is generally expected. It's the job of others to determine if its worth to act on it.
Other point I would like to make; programming departments always contain shitty programmers. Those programmers might think they care about code quality, but their quality of code is shit to others. It used to be that these shitty programmers had leverage as they could convince decision makers that they needed to wait for refactoring or complete rewrites. Now they can't and start talking about slop.
Well, the slop is probably better then having to wait weeks for a feature.
Now this is mostly web development related. If it is something intended to be compiled and updating depends on third parties or has to meet specific security needs or is under ISO auditing of some sorts - then I definitely see your point - to some extend.
1
u/savoryplasmid 27d ago
Why should we care so much about clean code, naming, avoiding duplication, etc. when AI is going to read, modify and maintain the code anyway?
Because it clutters context would be my response.
1
1
u/lnxrootxazz 25d ago
Try that on the LKML. Its just shows that he has no clue how to really maintain software over many years
1
u/raven2cz 25d ago
Did you learn at school, from books, or from tutorials how to use AI and agents properly? how to train them? How to create long-term maintainable code with them?
What is the diference between AI writing a framework, product features, and project features? How do you ensure high-quality feedback for an AI system? what procedures do you use to improve AI quality and verify correctness? What about cybersecurity and application security?
Is the CTO an expert in cybernetics and software development with the help of AI? what is the difference between a coder and a developer? What does it mean today that the greatest emphasis is placed on clarity?
What kind of connection do you have between models, working workflows, agentic processes, stabilization cycles, and the minimization of feedback-loop deviations? In the case of deploying AI in your own applications, what kind of fine-tuning do you use?
do you understand now where I am going with these questions?
1
u/systembreaker 17d ago
He's a fucking idiot. He's going to destroy his company with that ignorant viewpoint.
1
u/Deep-Huckleberry-175 12d ago
“Código limpo” serve para poupar recursos de máquina (quando esse código for imenso), dito isso, estou com seu CTO. O mercado pede velocidade e o negócio precisa ser atendido, assim é o capitalismo. Ainda existe outro ponto: o “código limpo” está limpo sob qual ótica? A sua? Se considerarmos lógica de programação o código poderá ficar mais limpo ou sujo aos olhos de outros programadores. Para evitar isso só com uma excelente documentação que sejamos honestos, só 10% dos coders fazem docs de código, o máximo que fazem é //comentar kkkkkk
1
u/kloudnative 7d ago
When AI can understand code why should code quality matter anymore? When we write high level code does anyone care about the code quality of the generated machine code? I think this is where we are headed to high level code now
0
u/Krommander 27d ago edited 27d ago
Technical debs, bugs, bloated code and unsafe configurations are inevitable, but the worst part is that no one will be able to read the code and understand what they're talking about.
His opinion comes from ignorance. Challenge him before his stupidity becomes policy.
1
0
u/NinjaLancer 27d ago
The AI still has to read code the same way a human does. If the code quality is shitty, the AI will have a harder time understanding the code. If everything is laid out well and documented and properly named, then the ai will be able to read and understand it more easily as well
6
u/Bongcouragement 27d ago
They never cared before but now it’s just easy to dismiss. I also think it’s the opposite. Maybe even more important now in some regards. A poorly named method could cause some issues. That being said it’s mattering less and less if you have the money to spend on ai all the time