That's probably what every generation of "older" programmers said - new programmers who did not do assembly will never be able to code etc.

> new programmers who did not do assembly will never be able to code etc

I see the results from programmers who never learned assembly.

Just like repairing and building cars from the ground up makes me a better driver. For example, the clutch in my car lasts a lot longer than it does for other drivers.

Then again, there is no clutch in an EV

I'm sure batteries and electric motors have their own quirks. For example, battery performance is dependent on temperature.

You are arguing against your point. Everything has its own quirks and no one has it easy or tough.

It doesn’t have it because it doesn’t need it, not because it somehow built abstraction around it. That’s not the case with modern computers, anything is built on top of everything.

1) false equivalence.

2) I am an old fart and had never said anything even remotely approaching "who did not do assembly will never be able to code". One can learn programming using any language. However some experience with the languages of multiple level definitely does not hurt.

In order to evaluate generated code you have to know how to program.

If you look at the mountains of crap that have been written in JS, for instance, those old programmers have been proven right.

Having no knowledge about assembly doesn’t stop me intervening with my JavaScript apps :)

Intervening can be done via LLM in some way I reckon

That’s not really a fair comparison here — A more fitting metaphor would be whether or not you could intervene on assembly code not knowing assembly.

Who said you need to know assembly.

>"Intervening can be done via LLM in some way I reckon"

This inspires much confidence