a day ago
- The author, a 25-year programming veteran, was initially skeptical of AI coding tools but tested new AI code agents (Opus 4.5, gpt-5.2-codex) to see if they could save time.
- In a controlled experiment using Claude Code, AI assistance reduced a tedious 4-hour task (writing UTF16 conversions and auditing string usage) to 30 minutes, and even when AI made mistakes, reviewing its code helped the author understand the problem faster.
- AI code agents are best used like an intern or paralegal—handling tedious, specific tasks under human guidance, while the programmer handles planning and review.
- The agents can handle feedback well (e.g., rewriting an O(n²) algorithm to O(n) when asked), but still require a skilled programmer to identify and correct issues.
- AI is useful for debugging analysis; in one case, it identified a degenerate hash function and a recent code change causing a freeze, saving hours of manual investigation.
- Using AI agents helped overcome procrastination on tasks like creating a Linux sysroot, and running multiple agents in the background felt like a superpower.
- The author addresses common criticisms: reviewing AI code prevents loss of codebase understanding; AI replaces typing, not thinking; programming is more than typing; and productivity gains may not be visible as new products but can enable smaller teams to achieve more.