> In the age of LLMs, debugging is going to be the large part of time spent.

That seems a premature conclusion. LLMs excel at meeting the requirements of users having little if any interest in debugging. Users who have a low tolerance for bugs likewise have a low tolerance for coding LLMs.

Interesting, I actually find LLMs very useful at debugging. They are good at doing mindless grunt work and a great deal of debugging in my case is going through APIs and figuring out which of the many layers of abstraction ended up passing some wrong argument into a method call because of some misinterpretation of the documentation.

Claude Code can do this in the background tirelessly while I can personally focus more on tasks that aren't so "grindy".

> In the age of LLMs, debugging is going to be the large part of time spent.

That seems a premature conclusion. LLMs are quite good as debugging and much faster than people.