this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2026
42 points (97.7% liked)
Asklemmy
55603 readers
388 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Reading speed is not equivalent to code review speed in the slightest! A good case study: https://static0.smartbear.co/support/media/resources/cc/book/code-review-cisco-case-study.pdf Tl;dr the ideal rate of code review is something like 300 lines per hour.
As someone who writes software for a living, these tools are simply nowhere near as good as a seasoned developer in terms of code quality. Getting them to write code at that level takes so much babysitting and tweaking that it is faster to just write it by hand. If you are not a full-time developer and are just writing some code on the side here and there, then yes, an LLM will probably do a better job. And thats ok! I've used them plenty and thought about this a lot as well. So I don't say this out of denial. But, at least for now, they are nowhere near a good as someone who knows what they are doing if you account for quality, and not just how fast the machine can spit out lines.