Why reviewing AI-generated code is more expensive than writing it
By
Ishmeet Bindra
4h ago· 2 min readenInsight
55/100
Doughy
Bagelometer↗
More flour than flavour. There's a bagel in here, just not much of one.
Score55TypeanalysisSentimentnegative
Summary
The article discusses how LLMs (large language models) approach code generation differently from humans. Unlike human developers who instinctively seek the shortest path (e.g., using existing libraries), LLMs treat writing 200 lines of implementation with the same cognitive effort as writing 2 lines of import. This means AI-generated code tends to reinvent the wheel rather than leveraging existing solutions. Consequently, reviewing AI-generated code has become more expensive because reviewers must read through lengthy implementations that could have been replaced with simple library imports.
Key quotes
· 4 pulledAn LLM defaults to building when it should be buying.
For an LLM, writing two hundred lines of implementation is the same cognitive effort as writing two lines of import.
There's no instinct to reach for the shortest path. The shortest path for the model is to implement it completely.
So reviewing AI-generated code has gotten more expensive.
LLMs aren’t lazy. They don’t cut corners because a simpler solution feels good enough. If they know how to solve something thoroughly, they will.
An LLM defaults to building when it should be buying. Not because it doesn’t know about exi
