yea its tough, when it comes to frontend you can go really fast because reviewing is easy since its something you can visually pick. for backend its exactly as you described, perhaps the ideal thing you could do is speed up your review by using ai rather than going over every line or spend more time planning and writing the spec.
I was the same when i just started using codex, i dont know the exact time but at some point i just stopped reviewing, dumb but the more i used it the more lazy i became.
Right, I do use AI for review and find it helpful most of the time (assuming it doesn't decide to be unnecessarily pedantic). I have found it struggles to reason through architectural implications or subtle performance problems when there isn't a specific linter for it, though.
For example, I'm instantiating something N times with this change. Each instantiation is fast, but this is a hot path. It's not clear whether that's safe or if it needs to be gated which is something a reviewer would ideally flag.
I suppose the counter-argument most people would make now is that if the AI didn't call it out, it's probably not likely enough of an issue to focus on -- even if it does wind up becoming a problem later.
Do you find yourself still trying to use AI tools for the synthesis portion of writing/coding, or have you gone back to the 'manual' ways?
I've pretty much completely dropped it for writing (but still use it for catching issues with clarity or logical flow afterwards). I've yet to get away from it for coding. Perhaps I keep trying with coding because I feel I'm doing something wrong (and because for a a little my performance was tied to usage of it...).
yea its tough, when it comes to frontend you can go really fast because reviewing is easy since its something you can visually pick. for backend its exactly as you described, perhaps the ideal thing you could do is speed up your review by using ai rather than going over every line or spend more time planning and writing the spec.
I was the same when i just started using codex, i dont know the exact time but at some point i just stopped reviewing, dumb but the more i used it the more lazy i became.
Right, I do use AI for review and find it helpful most of the time (assuming it doesn't decide to be unnecessarily pedantic). I have found it struggles to reason through architectural implications or subtle performance problems when there isn't a specific linter for it, though.
For example, I'm instantiating something N times with this change. Each instantiation is fast, but this is a hot path. It's not clear whether that's safe or if it needs to be gated which is something a reviewer would ideally flag.
I suppose the counter-argument most people would make now is that if the AI didn't call it out, it's probably not likely enough of an issue to focus on -- even if it does wind up becoming a problem later.
FWIW, I’m in the same minority(?) as you. I suspect that others just have lower standards of rigor.
Do you find yourself still trying to use AI tools for the synthesis portion of writing/coding, or have you gone back to the 'manual' ways?
I've pretty much completely dropped it for writing (but still use it for catching issues with clarity or logical flow afterwards). I've yet to get away from it for coding. Perhaps I keep trying with coding because I feel I'm doing something wrong (and because for a a little my performance was tied to usage of it...).