Thread · HN Continuity

I wonder if the definition of "code quality" needs to be updated? Consider DRY: There's a lot of cases where, if I was writing by hand, I'd prefer a succinct abstraction that's easier to type and reduces repetition - all good things right? Most developers, myself included, would gladly accept the complexity and runtime cost of a good abstraction if it saved them thousands of lines of boilerplate.

What about when repetitive typing is no longer a constraint? Do we need to pay for those abstractions? An LLM can scour the codebase and repeat patterns without getting tired. A simple-but-repetitive codebase might be ideal for an LLM.

This is one place I see AI coding changing the definition of code quality itself. I'm sure there are more...