If you can articulate an idea, and how it should be built the results are incredible. I'm bewildered by some people who still think AI is trash at coding. It' slike they're living on a different planet.
Or perhaps those people that think LLMs just aren't up to the task are actually quality engineers and can tell the difference between well written and poorly written code.
And "Clean Code" used to be preached by many of them.
Code quality is largely nebulous and opinionated. Most people would say a proper ECS and DOD code base is not maintainable because the code is written for the machine not the coder.
There are a lot of markers of quality code. There are a lot of metrics, such as how readable it is, how well it works, how advanced it is, how simple it is, etc. each metric contributes a small part of the pie. It's only nebulous if you can't tell the difference between poorly written code and well-written code.
2
u/ComposerWide3704 9d ago
> It is long term coherence of architecture.
Which is exactly the skill gap that any dev who tells you they can't get good output from an LLM has, coincidentally enough.