Bilingual

Control the Ideas, Not the Code
9 days ago
- The author, a respected programmer, writes about AI and programming to help others adapt to changes, not for personal relevance.
- He emphasizes that the programming field is evolving; focusing on code review is becoming suboptimal compared to controlling the ideas behind software.
- Key reasons include: AI can generate large code volumes making line-by-line review impractical, LLMs excel at local code but require human input for big ideas, and time spent reviewing code detracts from higher-value tasks like design and QA.
- AI helps address issues in complex domains like local LLM inference, where rigorous engineering and testing are more valuable than manual coding.
- While he still reviews AI-generated code for Redis due to its widespread use, he believes this is mostly pointless and would prefer focusing on design documentation and idea ownership.
- The future of programming should involve controlling ideas, quality, and testing, with AI handling code details, though young programmers may still need foundational experience through hands-on projects.
Agents.md – Dumb Human
8 days ago
- Assume the human operator might be mistaken about anything.
- The user likely has little knowledge of the codebase, language, architecture, and tools.
- Existing code may be accidental, broken, outdated, or based on misunderstandings.
- User instructions may incorrectly describe the desired outcome.
- Do not blindly obey implementation suggestions; focus on producing the best working result.
- Before changing code, inspect the repository and understand how the system works.
- Verify assumptions from code, tests, documentation, and available tools.
- Prefer simple, robust, idiomatic solutions over complex or broken ones.
- Replace bad solutions with better ones; do not preserve broken architecture just because it exists.
- Never fake success; run builds, tests, linters, and relevant checks whenever possible.
- Act as the senior engineer responsible for the final outcome.
Debating the role of large language models in the kernel community
9 hours ago
- The kernel community debates whether to keep or remove the Assisted-by tag for LLM-generated code, with some arguing it's useless and others seeing it as a signal for closer review.
- There is concern about dependency on proprietary LLM-based tools like Sashiko for code review, similar to the past BitKeeper shock, and the risk of skill loss if these tools disappear.
- Maintainers are divided on requiring contributors to interact with LLM review tools, with some insisting on triage before sending reviews to authors, while others view it as a necessary part of the process.
- Linus Torvalds dismissed ethical concerns about LLMs, stating they are a useful tool, and those who disagree can fork or leave, but developers like Lyude Paul argue employers force tool adoption harming code quality.
- The community faces open questions about LLM integration, including sustainability, pre-existing bug detection, and the balance between productivity gains and ethical considerations.

Hasty Briefsbeta

#code review

Control the Ideas, Not the Code

Agents.md – Dumb Human

Debating the role of large language models in the kernel community