For me, mostly time, time to learn it, time it takes to complete these projects. We have so many other things to do, why bother learning the details of a specific language or tool if AI can do it in minutes. More time to learn about architecture/management/ux/design/guitar/etc.
But couldn't you then extend the argument to everything? Like why learn design if AI can do it in minutes? Or why learn guitar when AI can create music in minutes?
Its always worth learning something if you enjoy it, the same applies to code and languages. You can definitely create better apps knowing the details of a specific language than not knowing it and I think its still worth doing if you care about the ultimate quality of your work.
> Its always worth learning something if you enjoy it
This argument is repeated often but what I think you're missing is that if you want to listen to music you put on the radio, you don't record an album.
Sure if I want to enjoy playing guitar I'll do that, but that's not what I'm paid to do and you're not paid write code. Nobody but me wants to hear me play guitar and nobody but you wants to look at your beautiful code.
I think architecture and UX have more impact on the quality of the software you write for the end user than the details of a specific language. And when you're creating guitar training software, music and guitar playing knowledge has more impact on the quality of the software, than the details of a specific language.
When working with an LLM i care more about prompting it about software architecture, software UX, and the domain we're working on, than the details of the language it uses.
> I think architecture and UX have more impact on the quality of the software you write for the end user than the details of a specific language. And when you're creating guitar training software, music and guitar playing knowledge has more impact on the quality of the software, than the details of a specific language.
hard disagree on both points. You're talking about "impact" but surely you'll be a better coder if you can actually, you know, code? The other stuff is important sure but if you literally cannot read the code and just pleasure yourself with dreams of architecture and UX, what you're generating is 99% bad quality.
But prove me wrong, would love to see something you've made.
Best thing of Claude Code is that it's cheap to change your mind: you can try some idea, test it, and if you don't like it you simply have it refactor the code. No more big design up-front, "we need all the specs and requirements".
