logoalt Hacker News

OptionOfTyesterday at 4:33 PM0 repliesview on HN

> Wherever LLM-generated code is used, it becomes the responsibility of the engineer. As part of this process of taking responsibility, self-review becomes essential: LLM-generated code should not be reviewed by others if the responsible engineer has not themselves reviewed it.

I think the review by the prompt writer should be at a higher level than another person who reviews the code.

If I know how to do something, it is easier for me to avoid mistakes while doing it. When I'm reviewing it it requires different pathways in my brain. Since there is code out there I'm drawn to that path, and I might not not always spot the problem points. Or code might be written in a way that I don't recognize, but still exhibits the same mistake.

In the past, as a reviewer I used to be able to count on my colleagues' professionalism to be a moat.

The size of the moat is inverse to the amount of LLM generated code in a PR / project. At a certain moment you can no longer guarantee that you stand behind everything.

Combine that with the push to do more faster, with less, meaning we're increasing the amount of tech debt we're taking on.