alt Hacker NewsYou fundamentally misunderstand AI assisted coding if you think it does the work for you, or that it gets it right, or that it can be trusted to complete a job.
It is an assistant not a team mate.
If you think that getting it wrong, or bugs, or misunderstandings, or lost code, or misdirections, are AI "failing", then yes you will fail to understand or see the value.
The point is that a good AI assisted developer steers through these things and has the skill to make great software from the chaotic ingredients that AI brings to the table.
And this is why articles like this one "just don't get it", because they are expecting the AI to do their job for them and holding it to the standards of a team mate. It does not work that way.
Replies
"You're holding it wrong"
[dead]
"I bought a subscription to Claude and it didn't write a perfectly coded application for me while I watched a game of baseball. AI sucks!"
That’s not what I meant. What I’m asking is whether there’s any evidence that the latest “techniques” (such as Ralph) can actually lead to high quality results both in terms of code and end product, and if so, how.