I think this could work well as a blog post. If you're not willing to read the code yourself, maybe you could at least go through the report yourself and point out issues it highlights, show the relevant code, and explain why that's actually bad.
But I only set out to get the overall vibe of what Yegge is doing. The static analysis [1] and the automaton's take [2] were plenty for doing that.
> …maybe you could at least
> go through the report yourself
> and point out issues it highlights
I suppose. But to be frank, I'm not that interested in the project to do a super deep dive.
It was all I could do to muster up the will to even do as much as I did eventually force myself to do.
I'm not the faniest fan boy of AI-assisted coding. But I appreciate them for what they're good at. To me, it delivered a stellar code review here.
> …show the relevant code,
> and explain why that's
> actually bad
I humbly don't think I could add anything that the LLM and static analysis haven't brilliantly illuminated already.
The Sonar Cloud analysis is super detailed. And the automaton's code review is on the money. Digging into their respective nitty gritty is left as an exercise for the reader.
People tend to read articles because the author is able to share insights that would be much harder -- whether in skill, time, or energy -- to come up with themselves.
But here you're asking to put the reader to put in more work than you did, to find an insight that may or may not be there.
What is your picture of the moment-by-moment thoughts of someone who would click this and upvote?
I think this could work well as a blog post. If you're not willing to read the code yourself, maybe you could at least go through the report yourself and point out issues it highlights, show the relevant code, and explain why that's actually bad.
But I only set out to get the overall vibe of what Yegge is doing. The static analysis [1] and the automaton's take [2] were plenty for doing that.
I suppose. But to be frank, I'm not that interested in the project to do a super deep dive.It was all I could do to muster up the will to even do as much as I did eventually force myself to do.
I'm not the faniest fan boy of AI-assisted coding. But I appreciate them for what they're good at. To me, it delivered a stellar code review here.
I humbly don't think I could add anything that the LLM and static analysis haven't brilliantly illuminated already.The Sonar Cloud analysis is super detailed. And the automaton's code review is on the money. Digging into their respective nitty gritty is left as an exercise for the reader.
[1] https://g2ww.short.gy/CCWutUHalfDone
[2] https://g2ww.short.gy/ItsaGasGasGas
People tend to read articles because the author is able to share insights that would be much harder -- whether in skill, time, or energy -- to come up with themselves.
But here you're asking to put the reader to put in more work than you did, to find an insight that may or may not be there.
What is your picture of the moment-by-moment thoughts of someone who would click this and upvote?
Ahhh! I think I get where you're coming from.
You're thinking I posted this "article" to get upvotes.
Now, you got two more guesses left for "Why'd he post this?"
Hint: I've written the answer twice already without me even having been explicitly asked to ;)