---
title: "Comment by Mihai_LeanZero on \"Traditional Coding vs Agentic Coding: The Flow State Problem\" | Hashnode"
description: "The bit about bigger handoffs weakening your understanding is the same thing I've run into with review gates on agent output. Making myself write out what a cha"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/traditional-coding-vs-agentic-coding-the-flow-state-problem/6ab02f54fd9900e44d4500a5/comment/6ab04b40f5423c8edbc284d6"
---

[Discussion](https://hashnode.com/posts/traditional-coding-vs-agentic-coding-the-flow-state-problem/6ab02f54fd9900e44d4500a5)

Comment [Traditional Coding vs Agentic Coding: The Flow State Problem](https://hashnode.com/posts/traditional-coding-vs-agentic-coding-the-flow-state-problem/6ab02f54fd9900e44d4500a5)

[Mihai\_LeanZero](https://hashnode.com/@mihaileanzero)

[Sep 20](https://hashnode.com/posts/traditional-coding-vs-agentic-coding-the-flow-state-problem/6ab02f54fd9900e44d4500a5/comment/6ab04b40f5423c8edbc284d6)

The bit about bigger handoffs weakening your understanding is the same thing I've run into with review gates on agent output. Making myself write out what a change should touch before accepting the diff ends up doing the same job as the write-run-observe loop, just moved earlier -- it's still work, but it catches the "looks convincing but I don't actually understand it" failure mode before it compounds across handoffs. Doesn't get back the moment-to-moment feedback though, that part I think is just gone with this workflow.