codingismycraft

Some people are convinced that AI will replace programming expertise overlooking fundamentals like good coding, proper testing, and robust quality assurance. Although AI may seem capable of generating code in many scenarios, it still falls far short of replacing the skilled human expert.

It's interesting how a manager who isn't a professional programmer—with coding experience limited to some academic work and a few simple 'say hello' scripts—can have such strong opinions about AI soon replacing junior developers. I think that this view reveals the underlying hope to completely eliminate the need for programmers, testers and in some cases even devops (!) altogether.

Programming isn’t just about writing code—it's about designing systems, planning for future changes, avoiding vendor lock-in, and ensuring everything works together seamlessly. The art and science of writing testable code that can be effectively quality assured, is one of the pillars of writting successful software, yet it often gets overlooked in favor of quickly produced, bug-ridden code full of niche edge cases from AI-generated solutions.

In the end of the day, AI is a tool to assist programmers, not a substitute for solid coding and testing practices. Using AI to generate testing data, create small functions with clear definitions and no side effects, and document code and procedures can be incredibly useful and boost developer productivity. However, this doesn't mean that AI-produced code should automatically be integrated into a codebase, replacing the programmer's skill, experience, and judgment—a practice that could quickly lead to software nightmares and disasters.