It requires real work to create good documentation and review it.
replyI've never worked in a place that requires that every commit update some documentation, but if you want to rebuild software based on the documentation, that's what it would take.
The best you could say is that the typical development process today tends to scatter documentation across commit descriptions, feature docs, design reviews, meeting notes, training materials, and source code comments.
To have a hands-off rewrite of a codebase with LLMS, you would need a level of documentation that allows a skilled human to do the rewrite without needing to talk to anyone else. I doubt that any project would have this unless it was required all along.
It doesn’t though. You tell the LLM what to document up front, it can be some domain specific detail or whatever. You don’t need to carefully review it unless things go wrong. You do change propagation and change everything (tears, docs, code) in sync when some spec aspect changes, which involves a QA feedback loop, which judges the correctness of code and tests (because the LLM wrote the tests, they can be wrong). I guess you could add doc review steps as well if you knew what to look for generically, but I found it’s ok at writing docs that I haven’t needed to do this yet.
reply