zlacker

Why would you ever, outside flight and medical software, care about being 100% sure that the change did not introduce any bugs?

>>KptMar+(OP)
Because bugs are bad. Fixing one bug but accidentally introducing three more is such a pattern it should have a name.

>>KptMar+(OP)
Because why would you make something broken when you could make something not broken?

>>jacque+A
They are. And we have processes to minimize them - tests, code review, staging/preprod envs - but they are nowhere close to being 100% sure that code is bug free - that's just way too high bar for both AI and purely human workflows outside of few pretty niche fields.

>>bandra+W
Because it's way too high bar to be 100% sure outside of few niche fields.

>>KptMar+63
When you use AI to 'fix' something you don't actually understand the chances of this happening go up tremendously.

>>jacque+A
I propose "the whack-a-hydra" pattern

>>mining+V5
Hehe, yes, very apt. It immediately gives the right mental image.