zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. ookbla+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-05-07 03:31:20
the future is probably something that looks pretty "inefficient" to us but a non-factor for a machine. i sometimes think a lot of our code structure is just for our own maintenance and conceptualization (DRY, SRP), but if you throw enough compute adn context at a problem im sure none of this even matters (as much).

at least for 90% of the CRUD apps out there, you can def abstract away the entire base framework of getting, listing, and updating records. i guess the problem is validating that data for use in other more complex workflows.

replies(1): >>bruce5+m1
2. bruce5+m1[view] [source] 2025-05-07 03:50:44
>>ookbla+(OP)
I've spent my career writing code in a language which already abstracts 90% of a CRUD-type app away. Indeed there are a whole subset of users who literally don't write a line of code. We've had this since the very early 90's for DOS.

Of course that last 10% does a lot of heavy lifting. Domain expertise, program and database design, sales, support, actually processing the data for more than just simple reports, and so on.

And sure, the code is not maximally efficient in all cases, but it is consistent, and deterministic. Which is all I need from my code generator.

I see a lot of panic from programmers (outside our space) who worry about their futures. As if programming is the ultimate career goal. When really, writing code is the least interesting, and least valuable part of developing software.

Maybe LLMs will code software for you. Maybe they already do. And, yes, despite their mistakes it's very impressive. And yes, it will get better.

But they are miles away from replacing developers- unless your skillset is limited to "coding" there's no need to worry.

[go to top]