---
title: "Comment by Julian Neagu on \"What happens when a coding agent forgets why a change was rejected?\" | Hashnode"
description: "The rejected changes part is what stood out to me. Git is good at showing what we kept, but not what we tested and threw away. That missing history gets expensi"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/what-happens-when-a-coding-agent-forgets-why-a-change-was-rejected/6aa015bcbe03d2ac71a46645/comment/6aa551113d43fb1a2486eb10"
---

[Discussion](https://hashnode.com/posts/what-happens-when-a-coding-agent-forgets-why-a-change-was-rejected/6aa015bcbe03d2ac71a46645)

Comment [What happens when a coding agent forgets why a change was rejected?](https://hashnode.com/posts/what-happens-when-a-coding-agent-forgets-why-a-change-was-rejected/6aa015bcbe03d2ac71a46645)

[Julian Neagu](https://hashnode.com/@julianneagulab)

[Sep 12](https://hashnode.com/posts/what-happens-when-a-coding-agent-forgets-why-a-change-was-rejected/6aa015bcbe03d2ac71a46645/comment/6aa551113d43fb1a2486eb10)

The rejected changes part is what stood out to me. Git is good at showing what we kept, but not what we tested and threw away. That missing history gets expensive once agents start working across sessions.

[Oliver Zehentleitner](https://hashnode.com/@oliver-zehentleitner)

[Sep 14](https://hashnode.com/posts/what-happens-when-a-coding-agent-forgets-why-a-change-was-rejected/6aa015bcbe03d2ac71a46645/comment/6aa551113d43fb1a2486eb10#reply-6aa79f3f9b5b94221934bd5a)

Exactly. That “missing history” is easy to ignore when humans still carry it in their heads.

But once agents work across fresh sessions, the cost becomes visible: the same dead ends get investigated again because the repo only shows what survived.

That is the part I find most interesting too.