If you are good at code review, you will be good at using AI agents

Re:If you are good at code review, you will be good at using... by nkmnz on Saturday September 20, 2025 @06:37AM (#45312114)

> This idea that you can get good results from a bad process

This idea is called "evolution"...

> as long as you have good quality control

...and it's QA is death on every single level of the systems: cell, organism, species, and ecosystem. You must consider that those devs or companies with not-good-enough QA will end up dead (from a business perspective).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:If you are good at code review, you will be good at using... by bluefirebrand on Saturday September 20, 2025 @09:35AM (#45313261)

So we're software evolvers now, not engineers?

Sounds like a stupid path forward to me

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:If you are good at code review, you will be good at using... by dwaltrip on Saturday September 20, 2025 @02:00PM (#45315668)

We’ve always been software evolvers. Ideas that have been around for decades, such as “a codebase is a garden”, are even more relevant now.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:If you are good at code review, you will be good at using... by monkeyelite on Sunday September 21, 2025 @06:46AM (#45321619)

Iterating on a design is not the same as throwing out crap until it works.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:If you are good at code review, you will be good at using... by dwattttt on Saturday September 20, 2025 @04:17PM (#45317009)

Evolution is extremely inefficient at producing good designs. Given enough time it'll explore more, because it's driven randomly, but most mutations either don't help, or downright hurt an organism's survival.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:If you are good at code review, you will be good at using... by rsynnott on Sunday September 21, 2025 @11:51AM (#45323798)

I look forward to software which takes several million years to produce and tends to die of Software Cancer.

Like, evolution is not _good_ at ‘designing’ things.

[ Parent | on HN ]