Serious question here.

Have you taken a moment to step back and truly evaluate your productivity when using LLMs for code generation?

I don't mean the obvious confirmation-bias tickling stuff like "create a form with these fields and validation".

I mean from a whole-system, total effort analysis, from idea to production, support and maintenance.

I'm curious what you find.

My current theory is that the industry will land in a place where LLMs for code generation are frowned upon for non-trivial work, but that they are embraced for tooling, summarization and explanation.

I think these things have real, concrete value, but that it's a mistake to substitute them for human reasoning - and human reasoning is a crucial characteristic of quality code.

The thing I'm not sure of is whether the current "good enough is good enough" approach to vibe coded solutions will be sticky, or in what contexts.

MS Access still powers entire business departments, because good enough is good enough.

I am not a professional coder. However, I have typically seen people respond more favorably to Code compared to other systems including Codex (percentage-wise). I'm curious to know what exactly you feel is inferior?

On the other hand, recently for me, the usage limits in Claude have been inconsistent and frustrating. I seem to get a lot less out of it than I have in the past and am considering trying one of the other big 3 sub plans to see whether it suits my use case more.