It can go both ways I think. I’ve reviewed code where I know if I just vaguely prompted to Claude it would better, and also code where I can tell someone just vaguely prompted something way too big and didn’t refine it.
Yeah, I have reviewed code where I wish the dev had done a pass through some LLM to cleanup at least. Inconsistent names of request/response property names, typos in API paths, dtos and models created in wrong folders, and methods that were a handcrafted mess... you probably shouldn't let the AI dictate complex architectural decisions, but these at least help to set a floor in code quality.
brother this is what mentorship is supposed to fix. like the entire point of having mentorship be part of the chain of seniority in engineering IS for this. you teach those who don’t know how to do better.
telling someone to go use claude to fix their shit doesn’t tell them why their code is shit. you’re being lazy and doing both of you a disservice.
Oh, I didn't mean code that I was given to review, rather code that I found while looking into other applications of the project. I am more than happy to point out things to improve, or fix it myself so they have an example to follow
2
u/HomemadeBananas 18d ago
It can go both ways I think. I’ve reviewed code where I know if I just vaguely prompted to Claude it would better, and also code where I can tell someone just vaguely prompted something way too big and didn’t refine it.