zlacker

>>strayd+(OP)
>The people really leading AI coding right now (and I’d put myself near the front, though not all the way there) don’t read code. They manage the things that produce code.

I can’t imagine any other example where people voluntarily move for a black box approach.

Imagine taking a picture on autoshot mode and refusing to look at it. If the client doesn’t like it because it’s too bright, tweak the settings and shoot again, but never look at the output.

What is the logic here? Because if you can read code, I can’t imagine poking the result with black box testing being faster.

Are these people just handing off the review process to others? Are they unable to read code and hiding it? Why would you handicap yourself this way?

>>kace91+Ek
your metaphor is wrong.

code is not the output. functionality is the output, and you do look at that.

>>hjoutf+Vs
Explain then how testing the functionality (not the new one; regressions included, this is not a school exercise) is faster than checking the code.

Are you writing black box testing by hand, or manually checking, everything that would normally be a unit test? We have unit tests precisely because of how unworkable the “every test is black box” approach is.