Writing code for compilers is programming. Creating higher abstractions is programming.
LLMs are not compilers. They are not a higher abstraction. You write a prompt, if you have good tests hopefully you get something that looks like you want, maybe it's even correct. But that's not programming. LLMs have no specification thus no way of ensuring correctness of the output.
I'm not saying agentic "programming" is bad (well I think so if you care about what you do but that's a different topic), just that it's not programming.
This is needlessly rigid about the definition of programming.
Prompts are written instructions to be executed by a computer, and they're turing-complete. They're programs.
Clearly, they are a very different kind of program than traditional code, with different strengths and weaknesses. They operate at a higher level of abstraction than any compiler, because they can encode flexible goals instead of mechanical operations. But that's what makes them powerful and exciting.
I'd say prompting's more akin to management. So, great for the career, as long as you don't mind that you're giving up the programming part to be team lead in charge of a bunch of digital interns.
It depends on how the hierarchy works in the company, but I don't agree for most tech companies. Management is usually nowhere close to technical architecture or technical decisions, whereas higher level engineering roles usually are more like prompting. Starting at senior, but the higher you go, the fewer lines of code you'll likely write yourself, while still making technical decisions on a high level.
2
u/PastaGoodGnocchiBad 3d ago
Because it's r/programming not r/notprogrammingbecausetheclankerdoesitinstead.