Reminds me of Niven/Pournelle's "The Mote in God’s Eye" where the aliens have a very pragmatic/Jury-rigged approach to technology and everything is more or less improvised.

I have noticed this with co-workers also, when you have the ability to read/write/understand things very quickly, you tend to spend much less time on making things tidy, clear and maintainable.

This is currently my workflow lol. I will build features and functions rapidly then extract and rebuild into smaller more focused pieces of software. I think of it like oil painting. I’m able to paint over, scrape off and repaint relevant sections without being burdened by the complexity of what has already been painted.

You use an AI to make the spaghetti.

You use another AI to document the spaghetti.

You use the third AI to make a spicy meatball from the spec.

Interestingly, I have personally felt this way about projects in which I was involved in the past(written both by me and by others)…

sometimes starting from scratch just faster and/or easier.

>just throw the code away and rebuild it

What about all the undocumented "adjustments" ("bug fixes" in a professional context) that were made to make it actually useful?

> This also assumes that the same application build by humans wouldn't become a "spaghetti mess".

nah, it reflects on how applications built by humans usually do become spaghetti messes with all the resulting brittleness and unintended negative side effects of changes that result

but it probably doesn't matter for a little toy piano app

Have better agents rewrite it in the future.

And the models of the future will surely be better than they are today. This stuff is still a very long way from maturity.

Sometimes it seems like they're moving very slowly. That makes sense: It's easy to get used to how they work today and it is also easy to forget how much worse they were last year.

When we look back and realize that just 4 years ago these tools didn't really exist at all, it becomes clear that the rate of progress is rather amazing.

In 4 years, we've gone from "hah, good luck with that crap!" to "little kids writing music-learning games on their own in a few minutes"

That's pretty friggin' awesome, and it's not finished yet. :)

I think that sort of careless waste is a very human behavioral pattern, but then we are the ones training these bots.

ed sp

errors compound

Eh, not really. It's the same issue with porting. You always rely on features you didn't properly articulate.

Good luck to future models figuring out which weird section of code are bugs and which are features.

AI writes faster, so the rate it incurs tech debt is proportionally higher. However it's ability to have large context kept on memory compared to humans is also a key component fighting against it. These are occasionally forgotten when code quality of AI for large code bases are discussed. So Yes I think humans also build spaghetti, but as they write slower they get to the same place a lot later. However humans can't correct it, or can't correct it fast enough. AI can.

I agree with this. Clean code is important today because it helps humans to understand it. Cleanliness is not otherwise intrinsically valuable.

Today I don't always need to understand the code. When I do, I can ask the LLM to explain the code or to specify the algorithm in pseudocode or even re-write the code until I can understand it.

I think, as an industry, we haven't yet fully grasped the impact of agentic coding. We don't yet know what software engineering is going to be like in 5 to 10 years.