Ask HN: Is anyone still programming the old-fashioned way (without LLMs)?
14 philbo 19 6/9/2025, 8:39:01 AM
There's so much content about AI-assisted programming now that I'm genuinely curious to hear from people who aren't using LLMs in their regular workflow.
I've tried Cursor and Claude Code and have seen them both do some impressive things, but using them really sucks the joy out of programming for me. I like the process of thinking about and implementing stuff without them. I enjoy actually typing the code out myself and feel like that helps me to hold a better mental model of how stuff works in my head. And when I have used LLMs, I've felt uncomfortable about the distance they put between me and the code, like they get in the way of deeper understanding.
So I continue to work on my projects the old-fashioned way, just me and vim, hacking stuff at my own pace. Is anyone else like this? Am I a dinosaur? And is there some trick for the mental model problem with LLMs?
Annecdotally, what we've found was that those using AI assistants show superficial improvements in productivity early, but they learn at a much slower rate and their understanding of the systems is fuzzy. It leads to lots of problems down the road. Senior folks are also susceptible to these effects, but at a lower level. We think it's because most of their experiences are old fashioned "natty" coding.
In a way, I think programmers need to do natty coding to train their brains before augmenting/amputating it with AI.
Coding agents still give you control (at least for now), but are like having really good autocomplete. Instead of using copilot to complete a line or two, using something like Cursor you can generate a whole function or class based on your spec then you can refine and tweak the more nuanced and important bits where necessary.
For example, I was doing some UI stuff the other day and in the past it would have taken a while just to get a basic page layout together when you're writing it yourself, but with a coding assistant I generated a basic page asking it to use an image mock up, a component library and some other pages as references. Then I could get on and do the fun bits of building the more novel parts of the UI.
I mean if it's code you're working on for fun then work however you like, but I don't know why someone would employ a dev working in such an inefficient way in 2025.
>I don't know why someone would employ a dev working in such an inefficient way in 2025.
It amazes me how fast the hype has taken off. There is no credible evidence that, for experienced devs, working with AI coding tools makes you significantly more productive.
Honestly, project scaffolding is such a small part of the job. I spend a lot more time reading, designing, thinking critically about, reviewing changes to, and generally maintaining code than I do creating greenfield projects or writing boilerplate. For all of these tasks having actually written the code myself gives me an advantage. I don't believe today's tools are a net positive.
Of course. So if I'm faced with some boilerplate, I try to refactor it away so it's less boilerplatey. Perhaps I'm lucky but mostly this seems to work, I don't often find myself writing boilerplate.
> I don't know why someone would employ a dev working in such an inefficient way in 2025
Am I working inefficiently? I'm not sure. How much time does the typing part of programming actually take up? I guess it varies, but it's definitely less than 50% for me. Thinking/designing/communicating/listening take most of my time. The typing part is not a bottleneck.
The majority of the code I write is not boilerplate, and writing the boilerplate myself is useful to me.