• [object Object]@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    lol

    When I was 27 I’d been coding for 15 years, so age alone shouldn’t be the red flag.

    What is going to be a pop problem is the insane number of Chesterton fences stomped down that fuck everything over, or things that look like they can be optimized out or use cases you don’t think actually happen.

    See rust core utils for an example of extremely well trodden and well reviewed software that ran into these issues for years. Not that it’s a bad effort, it’s an inherently hard task.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hit the nail on the head there.

      Every bit of weird code the LLM wants to simplify is a workaround for some old bug.

      See also that old Joel Spolsky essay about how rewrites reimplement the bugs the legacy system fixed long ago.

      • [object Object]@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yep, rarely do devs add more code just for fun. They’ll do it when the incentives are misaligned (e.g. the new modern trend of LOC changed), or doing stuff like “speed loops” to appease really shit management.

        Usually when there’s some obscure extra rule in the code it’s because there was some hardware fault, an undocumented use case, a complaint from a key client, or an intermittent failure.

        Anyways, I’ll be sitting over here with some popcorn.

    • abc@suppo.fi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, 27 is actually the perfect starting age to do something like this. In my 40s I could also execute this, but wouldn’t want the stress.