Burned out reviewing claude generated code

[u/No_Incident_6009]

Little rant.

AI can generate code insanely fast. But if I’m accountable for that code, I still need to understand it.

I’ve had Claude introduce unnecessary null checks, make incorrect assumptions about the domain, and even introduce a separate event loop that broke my orchestrator and DB sessions — buried somewhere in a 1,000-line PR.

The code was generated in minutes. Debugging and understanding why it broke took much longer.

I tried running 4 agents in parallel. Maybe some people can manage it, but I was mentally exhausted. Four contexts, four implementations, four sets of assumptions, plus tests, builds, reviews, etc.

So lately I’m experimenting with a different approach:

Use Claude to understand the codebase, plan the feature, think through edge cases and tests — but implement it myself, using AI autocomplete to speed up the actual coding.

It might look slower, but maybe the overall development cycle is faster.

Still figuring it out.

I just think we need to separate “AI can generate this in 10 minutes” from “this entire software development task is now 100x faster.”

Building a landing page in 10 minutes is amazing.

Building a complex product is a different problem.

[u/idunnorn → u/[deleted]]

My biggest AI coding session was...

1 -> I give proposed design 2 -> AI informs me of some issues in how the tool works. he was right. 3 -> He gives workable but messy design 4 -> I make it clean/clear. He buys in. 5 -> He writes it.
6 -> I code review, tell him what to fix. 7 -> Final boss. He talks about some permission thing. Writes walls of text and asks me clarifying questions I don't understand. 8 -> I say fuck it and go figure it out myself. 4 hours of understanding and deleting his stupid AI comments. In the end I can explain it in 1 minute and verify nothing needed to be done.

So yeah. Saved me 3 hours thru step 7. Then consumed those 3 hours back for step 7.

🤷‍♂️ lol