zlacker

[return to "Coding assistants are solving the wrong problem"]
1. monero+M9[view] [source] 2026-02-03 06:00:44
>>jinhku+(OP)
First you must accept that engineering elegance != market value. Only certain applications and business models need the crème de le crème of engineers.

LLM has been hollowing out the mid and lower end of engineering. But has not eroded highest end. Otherwise all the LLM companies wouldn’t pay for talent, they’d just use their own LLM.

◧◩
2. WD-42+7f[view] [source] 2026-02-03 06:48:56
>>monero+M9
I keep hearing this but I don’t understand. If inelegant code means more bugs that are harder to fix later, that translates into negative business value. You won’t see it right away which is probably where this sentiment is coming from, but it will absolutely catch up to you.

Elegant code isn’t just for looks. It’s code that can still adapt weeks, months, years after it has shipped and created “business value”.

◧◩◪
3. gerane+Sr[view] [source] 2026-02-03 08:33:05
>>WD-42+7f
People sometimes conflate inelegance with buggy code, where the market fit and value matter more than code elegance. Bugs still are not acceptable even in your MVP. Actually I think buggy software especially if those bugs destroy user experience, will kill products. It’s not 2010 anymore. There are a lot of less buggy software out there and attention spans are narrower than before.

edit: typo

[go to top]