Nobody said you should? Some people merely enjoy programming more than engineering.

> Nobody said you should?

This is dishonest. Your quip was to imply that I'm reducing what is otherwise a fun activity to an automation, on the basis of a purity test.

> Some people merely enjoy programming more than engineering.

And I haven't said otherwise, so I'm not sure what point youre trying to make. My initial goal was to provide my own viewpoint on how to enjoy the process while taking advantage of modern tools, not to tell people they shouldn't enjoy programming more than engineering.

Most dont :)

I wasn't expecting the answer to be "because copy-pasting would involve too much thinking".

Some people are borderline afraid to touch their keyboards these days.

How does copy pasting an error into an LLM involve thinking?

At the very least, I would imagine you'd read and think about the error, parse through and clean it up for unneeded bits if the whole thing isn't relevant and write around it to provide context on what happened / possible things to correlate with it in case you have hypotheses to work out.

Is your buddy incapable of speaking on his own behalf? Im sure he's aware of the reputational damage he's caused your company by now...

I've witnessed SQL executed with a where clause be wrapped in a function which then iterates over the result to re-enforce the where clause.

People need to read the slop they're throwing at reviewers.

Magnetic domain

Personally I've seen way more duplication as a result of AI in large codebases

> the PR description is entirely Claude.

Well, clearly more than just the description. Might as well be upfront about that.

This is more about a hard dependency which causes a function to early exit

I'm absolutely right.