Commenter:
> What % of the code is written by you and what % is written by ai
OP:
> Good question!
>
> All the code, architecture, logic, and design in minikv were written by me, 100% by hand. I did use AI tools only for a small part of the documentation—specifically the README, LEARNING.md, and RAM_COMMUNITY.md files—to help structure the content and improve clarity.
>
> But for all the source code (Rust), tests, and implementation, I wrote everything myself, reviewing and designing every part.
>
> Let me know if you want details or want to look at a specific part of the code!
Oof. That is pretty damning.
———
It’s unfortunate that em-dashes have become a shibboleth for AI-generated text. I love em-dashes, and iPhones automatically turn a double dash ( -- ) into an em dash.
I took a look at the source code -- well, what if it's a working thing -- and of course, 2 files in, there are instructions that panic (i.e. crash the host process), all over the code, just everywhere, in every API method. That's nowhere near "production ready" as the author's LLM says.
I've seen, 17 year ago, a schoolboy make "his own OS", which was simply Ubuntu with replaced logos. He got on TV with it, IIRC he was promoting it on the internets (forums back then), and kept insisting that this was his own work. He was bullied in response and in a few weeks disappeared from the nets.
What has it to do with me personally, if I'm not the author, nor a bully? Today I learned that I can't trust the new libraries posted in official repos. They can be just wrapper code slop. In 2012, Jack Diedrich in his speech "Stop Writing Classes" said that he'd read every library source code to find if there was anything stinky. I used to think it's a luxury of time and his qualification to read into what you use. Now it became a necessity, at least for new projects.
I doubt the equities analysts would appreciate this as much as a tech nerd would. It'd be seen as a step backwards and evidence of having no clue which way the world is heading.
The “fix_ci_complete…” script was written (by me) to patch some CI integration issues—if the style looks generic, it’s probably because it’s a standard shell script pattern.
I haven’t used LLMs to write or patch any code in minikv; any fix or automation was written and debugged manually.
If there’s something specific in the script that seems suspect, I’m happy to explain or walk through it line by line.
Again, all implementation code in minikv is mine, and I’m always open to reviewing anything that looks unclear—transparency is important to me.
This script was actually written manually to automate some repeated local fixes—mainly to speed up my workflow and make sure patches were applied consistently (and safely, with backups).
The colorful output and detailed logging are just for clarity and UX; I tend to over-comment my scripts out of habit—no AI tools were involved here (nor elsewhere in the code).
But I get why it might look generic—happy to explain any section line by line if you want!
Those whiteboarding sessions and discussions used to serve as useful opportunities for context building. Where will that context be built within the cycle now? During a production incident?
reply