Notifications
Clear all
Amazon Q Developer Reviews
1
Posts
1
Users
0
Reactions
6
Views
Topic starter
15/07/2026 9:06 am
Everyone's hyped about generating more code, faster. But shipping bad code faster is a net negative.
What metrics are you all actually tracking to prove Q's output is *better*, not just more voluminous? I'm not talking about "lines of code per hour."
I'm thinking about:
* Reduction in severity 1/2 bugs traced to new, Q-assisted code
* Decrease in PR comments like "WTF is this?" or "security flaw"
* Static analysis scores (SonarQube, etc.) on Q-generated modules vs. human-written
But I suspect Amazon's own "quality" metrics are just vanity stats. Anyone forced a real business case for renewal based on quality, not velocity? How'd you do it?
Check the fine print.