Reviewing code is absolutely different from writing it, and in my opinion much harder if the goal is more than surface level understanding.<p>This is what I am still grappling with. Agents make more productive, but also probably worse at my job.
<p><pre><code> > I do read the code, but reviewing code is very different from producing it, and surely teaches you less. If you don’t believe this, I doubt you work in software.
</code></pre>
I work in software and for single line I write I read hundredths of them.<p>If I am fixing bugs in my own (mostly self-education) programs, I read my program several times, over and over again. If writing programs taught me something, it is how to read programs most effectively. And also how to write programs to be most effectively read.
> If I am fixing bugs in my own (mostly self-education) programs, I read my program several times<p>I think here lies the difference OP is talking about. You are reading your own code, which means you had to first put in the effort to write it. If you use LLMs, you are reading code you didn't write.
>hundredths of them<p>Man, it would rule so much if programmers were literate and knew how to actually communicate what they intend to say.
It's obvious from the context here what the intended meaning was. Everyone makes typos sometimes.
Not everyone has English as a first language.
Man it would rule so much if programmers could manage not to be assholes by default so much of the time.<p>It's ironic that the more ignorant one is the one calling another ignorant.<p>Alright I've had my fun with the name-calling. I will now explain the stunningly obvious. Not a thing anyone should have to for someone so sharp as yourself but there we are...<p>For someone to produce that text after growing up in an English speaking environment, they would indeed be comically inept communicators. Which is why the more reasonable assumption is that English is not in fact their native language.<p>Not merely the more generous assumption. Being generous by default would be a better character trait than not, but still arguably a luxury. But also simply the more reasonable assumption by plain numbers and reasoning. So, not only were you a douche, you had to go out of your way to select a less likely possibility to make the douche you wanted to be fit the situation.<p>Literate programmers indeed.
> reviewing code is very different from producing it, and surely teaches you less<p>Maybe he meant "reviewing code from coding agents"? Reviewing code from other humans is often a great way to learn.
This is why I still haven't embraced agents in my work but stick with halfway manual workflow using aider. It's the only way I can keep ownership of the codebase. Maybe this will change because code ownership will no longer have any value, but I don't feel like we're there yet.
[dead]