this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2026
122 points (100.0% liked)
Programming
28481 readers
212 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One canwork in tech and not use LLMs. Your comment sounds like it should be the norm, or already is.
Also, the discussion is about using LLMs in open source projects, which put a lot more focus on understandable and maintainable code than the software industry typically happens to do.
I work in tech and I don't use LLMs. From my experience, they're catastrophic especially in those positions where they review code/actions. Reviews are the last line of defense against bad code, bugs, vulnerabilities or destructive actions. Giving that role to an RNG parrot that is often confidently wrong is almost suicidal.
That's interesting. I am currently searching for ways that I can use them a bit to chill-pill our CTO without sinking the company (which is very deep in the water with technical debt).... at least until I get another job.
Can you expand why they are that bad in this use?
My current idea is to pin up new architecture by hand, define new interfaces by hand, and then let the LLM occasionally fill in a function body. And maybe, maybe, an "ai refactored" branch which has just the purpose to showcase what happens if one is not careful - and will never be merged, at least not by me.