Post #1722039
2026-04-19 16:52 UTC
i think the idea that there is a quick, easy measure of "good code" that is universally applicable and not filled with holes is... well it's just not true, and we're not even close to defining the problem rigourously, let alone solving it.
Replies (2)
-
@jneen@unstable.systems 2026-04-19 16:52
we already had this discourse a decade ago over TDD, and the result was a pretty universal "automated tests are important and you should have them, but it doesn't mean you don't need QA"
-
@mmcknett@hachyderm.io 2026-05-01 02:59
@jneen oh, see, that’s fine, we’ll just ask codex to define good code, and then we’ll have it write that. All of the solutions to AI’s shortcomings involve applying even more AI, of course!