For a brand new project that you're trying to get done in a weekend--aka a weekend hackathon project--it's very doable. Would not recommend committing 7500 lines of code per day at your day job though.
If you work 8 hours a day on Saturday and Sunday and each line has on average 40 characters, then on average you have to type about 5 characters a second to hit 7000 lines of code.
There's some heavy assumptions about boilerplate or autogenerated code going on in that estimate, as I don't think very many average 5 characters a second over 16 hours.
Haha, I appreciate the math, fair enough. We can change the caveat to "it's a project you worked on every weekend for a few months" if that helps. The point still stands that 15k LOC doesn't represent the type of codebases worked on by companies that employ multiple full-time software developers, much less long-lived enterprise codebases (which is Fowler's famed area of expertise, ironically).
The two assumptions that aren't quite right are the number of characters per line and the number of hours per day. For most work it's hard to spend more than four to six good hours per day just doing actual work; but when kicking tires on a hobby project, it is easily possible to stay engaged for an unhealthy amount of hours in a row.
I write 1000 lines of code per second, bud. It's called ctrl+c and ctrl+v. In all seriousness, with autocompletion, snippets, and AI, I don't think you can measure this accurately in the way you're doing it.
In English, the average word length is 5 characters. If you can type 60 WPM that means you're typing on average at least 300 characters per minute or at least 5 characters per second (at least because this is not counting the needed whitespace and punctuation). That makes it technically possible for a moderately capable typist to pull off 7000 lines in a day using your numbers. Pair that with IDEs and autocomplete and it becomes much more feasible, if you have a solid understanding of the objective for your code.
40 seems way too much. “}” alone probably makes up a significant portion of lines. Another thing is auto-complete that does the majority of typing anyway.
I'm sorry but unless you count framework bootstraps for models and configs and stuff like that as "coding" nobody is legitimately writing 7500 lines in a day. At my most productive, powering through real problems, debugging issues and making stuff solid, I've hit ~3500 with marathon code sessions and ChatGPT. I've seen industry leaders and competitive coders in action, and none of them were significantly faster - any speed difference is more due to taking fewer incorrect solution paths.
Everyone is missing the point. Fine, maybe the math is off and it took 3 days instead of 2.
The issue is that Cursor tends to be demoed for incredibly small, green, and simple projects.
Most of us are working on codebases with at least over 10 million lines. I would love an AI agent that can massive infrastructure migrations with only a bit of oversight. Didn’t Shopify do something like that recently?
I think this is still an area that needs a lot of work.
I've been personally surprised that this doesn't come up more often. Most mature codebases span a decade or more, and especially in the web, there's so many layers of evolving technologies that were introduced during this time, resulting in complex geological layers forming in the codebase as the patterns evolved. That is not only a lot of lines of code, but a lot of nuance as well. Even a basic problem like routing can make these AIs fall flat on their face because of the sheer context and complexities involved
