LLMs create "bad" code
In the last two days, Iāve departed radically with my code gen usage. Iām no longer using it to augment my work, Iām orchestrating it, sitting back, and merely approving the results. #
It feels like crap. Iām not having fun anymore. Iām barely touching the code, for one, and I also know that the code Iām generating is so bad even I donāt want to read it. #
Thatās a pretty harsh statement, no? What determines how āgoodā or ābadā code is? What is bad about this code, exactly? #
Maybe itās the verbosity? #
I have a friend who is very verbose. Sometimes they explain in 5 sentences what most people can relate to in 5 words or less. They speak to feel heard, rather than be heard. It can get tiring, but at least they are speaking in a way that is beautiful for the ear to listen to. Llms? Not so much. #
Or maybe itās just unfamiliarity? #
I think I find that the code is not tasty because I havenāt spent the time seasoning it. Or maybe it is true that the secret ingredient is the love of the creator. #
When Iām writing words, I read back what Iāve written and it feels like the words are a part of me. I donāt have exactly that relationship with code Iāve written from scratch, but I do identify with the thoughts in my brain that I had when writing it. With this codegen code, itās blank. Thereās a nothingness that cannot be related to. #
Much has been written about the voice of the creator that llms havenāt been able to replicate. I think whatās Iām missing here is the voice of the programmer whose code I am reviewing? When I look at their code, instead of thinking, āhmmm thatās an interesting way to solve the problemā I look at their scratch files and wonder what prompt they used to get all this boilerplate while my eyes glaze over looking at the code. #