__abc
Joined 15 years ago
Karma
452
Submissions
208
Member since
Dec 2
Joined 15 years ago
Are other orgs not relying on the fundamentals of software engineering and adapting to this form of generated code?
PS: I don't allow one-shots. Same decomposition and quality assurance motions. The timeline has just shrunk, not the steps, nor the focus. The medium for documenting and governamce have shifted, same strategies and problems.
Am I really on an island with this?
The New town we moved to is great. Oldest kid in accelerated programs, accelerating. Younger kid got the support she needed to catch up. :chefs_kiss:
Taking a step back, I don’t know how ‘equity’ got twisted into creating a lowering tide for all vs. a rising tide for all. So confusing.
I've built around Claude (althought the infra is LLM agnostic) and the code it produces is okay. You can invest and get better. However, that was the same BEFORE llm generated code.
I'm finding that my investment motions, governance motions are more about medium change, not much else.
Standardards, guidelines, et al are now stored in .md vs. wiki, docs, etc.
Code reviews are still code reviews.
Release planning is still releaes planning.
All the same motions. JUST LOTS MORE OF THEM.
But we've scaled quality throughput before. It's just with a new IDE.