Skip to content

Why is My React Reducer Called Twice and What the Heck is a Pure Function?

Why is My React Reducer Called Twice and What the Heck is a Pure Function?

This article was written over 18 months ago and may contain information that is out of date. Some content may be relevant but please refer to the relevant official documentation or available resources for the latest information.

Why is My React Reducer Called Twice and What the Heck is a Pure Function?

In a recent project, we encountered an interesting issue: our React reducer was dispatching twice, producing incorrect values, such as incrementing a number in increments of two.

We hopped on a pairing session and started debugging. Eventually, we got to the root of the problem and learned the importance of pure functions in functional programming. This article will explain why our reducer was being dispatched twice, what pure functions are, and how React's strict mode helped us identify a bug in our code.

The Issue

We noticed that our useReducer hook was causing the reducer function to be called twice for every action dispatched. Initially, we were confused about this behavior and thought it might be a bug in React. Additionally, we had one of the dispatches inside a useEffect, which caused it to be called twice due to React strict mode, effectively firing the reducer four times and further complicating our debugging process. However, we knew that React's strict mode caused useEffect to be called twice, so it didn't take very long to realize that the issue was not with React but with how we had implemented our reducer function.

React Strict Mode

React's strict mode is a tool for highlighting potential problems in an application. It intentionally double-invokes specific lifecycle methods and hooks (like useReducer and useEffect) to help developers identify side effects. This behavior exposed our issue, as we had reducers that were not pure functions.

What is a Pure Function?

A pure function is a function that:

  • Is deterministic: Given the same input, always returns the same output.
  • Does Not Have Side Effects: Does not alter any external state or have observable interactions with the outside world.

In the context of a reducer, this means the function should not:

  • Modify its arguments
  • Perform any I/O operations (like network requests or logging)
  • Generate random numbers
  • Depend on any external state

Pure functions are predictable and testable. They help prevent bugs and make code easier to reason about. In the context of React, pure functions are essential for reducers because they ensure that the state transitions are predictable and consistent.

The Root Cause: Impure Reducers

Our reducers were not pure functions. They were altering external state and had side effects, which caused inconsistent behavior when React's strict mode double-invoked them. This led to unexpected results and made debugging more difficult.

The Solution: Make Reducers Pure

To resolve this issue, we refactored our reducers to ensure they were pure functions. Here's an extended example of how we transformed an impure reducer into a pure one in a more complex scenario involving a task management application.

Let's start with the initial state and action types:

const initialState = {
  tasks: [],
  completedTasks: [],
  currentTaskIndex: 0,
};

const ActionTypes = {
  ADD_TASK: "ADD_TASK",
  COMPLETE_TASK: "COMPLETE_TASK",
  RESET_TASKS: "RESET_TASKS",
  NEXT_TASK: "NEXT_TASK",
};

And here's the impure reducer similar to what we had initially:

import { initialState } from "./reducer-states";

export function reducer(state, action) {
  switch (action.type) {
    case "ADD_TASK":
      state.tasks.push(action.payload); // Direct state modification
      return { ...state };

    case "COMPLETE_TASK":
      state.completedTasks.push(state.tasks[state.currentTaskIndex]); // Direct state modification
      state.tasks.splice(state.currentTaskIndex, 1); // Direct state modification
      return { ...state };

    case "RESET_TASKS":
      return {
        ...state,
 tasks: initialState.tasks,
 completedTasks: initialState.completedTasks,
 currentTaskIndex: initialState.currentTaskIndex,
      };

    case "NEXT_TASK":
      state.currentTaskIndex =
 (state.currentTaskIndex + 1) % state.tasks.length; // Direct state modification
      return { ...state };

    default:
      return state;
  }
}

This reducer is impure because it directly modifies the state object, which is a side effect. To make it pure, we must create a new state object for every action and return it without modifying the original state. Here's the refactored pure reducer:

import { initialState } from "./reducer-states";

export function reducer(state, action) {
  switch (action.type) {
    case "ADD_TASK":
      return {
        ...state,
 tasks: [...state.tasks, action.payload],
      };

    case "COMPLETE_TASK":
      const completedTask = state.tasks[state.currentTaskIndex];
      return {
        ...state,
 tasks: state.tasks.filter(
          (_, index) => index !== state.currentTaskIndex
 ),
 completedTasks: [...state.completedTasks, completedTask],
 currentTaskIndex:
          state.tasks.length > 1
            ? state.currentTaskIndex % (state.tasks.length - 1)
            : 0,
      };

    case "RESET_TASKS":
      return {
        ...state,
 tasks: initialState.tasks,
 completedTasks: initialState.completedTasks,
 currentTaskIndex: initialState.currentTaskIndex,
      };

    case "NEXT_TASK":
      return {
        ...state,
 currentTaskIndex: (state.currentTaskIndex + 1) % state.tasks.length,
      };

    default:
      return state;
  }
}

Key Changes:

  • Direct State Modification: In the impure reducer, the state is directly modified (e.g., state.tasks.push(action.payload)). This causes side effects and violates the principles of pure functions.
  • Side Effects: The impure reducer included side effects such as logging and direct state changes. The pure reducer eliminates these side effects, ensuring consistent and predictable behavior.

I've created an interactive example to demonstrate the difference between impure and pure reducers in a React application. Despite the RESET_TASKS action being implemented similarly in both reducers, you'll notice that the impure reducer does not reset the tasks correctly. This problem happens because the impure reducer directly modifies the state, leading to unexpected behavior. Check out the embedded StackBlitz example below:

Conclusion

Our experience with the reducer dispatching twice was a valuable lesson in the importance of pure functions in React. Thanks to React's strict mode, we identified and fixed impure reducers, leading to more predictable and maintainable code. If you encounter similar issues, ensure your reducers are pure functions and leverage React strict mode to catch potential problems early in development. By embracing functional programming principles, you can write cleaner, more reliable code that is easier to debug and maintain.

This Dot is a consultancy dedicated to guiding companies through their modernization and digital transformation journeys. Specializing in replatforming, modernizing, and launching new initiatives, we stand out by taking true ownership of your engineering projects.

We love helping teams with projects that have missed their deadlines or helping keep your strategic digital initiatives on course. Check out our case studies and our clients that trust us with their engineering.

You might also like

Remix's evolution to a Vite plugin cover image

Remix's evolution to a Vite plugin

The Remix / React Router news is a beautiful illustration of software evolution. You start with a clear idea of what you’re building, but it’s impossible to anticipate exactly what it will become. If you haven’t heard the news yet, Ryan Florence announced at React Conf 2024 that Remix will be a Vite plugin for React Router. It’s a sort of surprising announcement but it makes a lot of sense if you’ve been following along as Remix the project has evolved. In this post we’ll recap the evolution of the project and then dig into what this change means for the future of Remix in the Server Components era of React. 🗓️ October 2021 > Remix is open sourced In the beginning, Remix cost money. In October 2021 they received some seed funding and the project was open sourced. Remix was an exciting new framework for server-rendering React websites that included API’s for loading data on the server and submitting data to the server with forms. It started a trend in the front-end framework space that a lot of other popular frameworks have modeled after or taken inspiration from. 🗓️ March 2022 - September 2022 > Remixing React Router At some point they realized that the API’s that they had created for Remix were a more natural fit in React Router. In this post Ryan details the plans to move these Remix API’s into React Router. Several months later, React Router 6.4 is released with the action, loader, and other Remix API’s baked in. > "We've always thought of Remix as "just a compiler and server for React Router" After this release, Remix is now mostly as they described - a compiler and server for React Router. 🗓️ October 2023 - February 2024 > Remix gets Vite support If you’re not familiar with Vite, it’s an extremely popular tool for front-end development that handles things like development servers and code bundling/compiling. A lot of the modern front-end frameworks are built on top of it. Remix announced support for Vite as an alternative option to their existing compiler and server. Since Remix is now mostly “just a compiler and server for React Router” - what’s left of Remix now that Vite can handle those things? 🗓️ May 2024 > Remix is React Router The Remix team releases a post detailing the announcement that Ryan made at React Conf. Looking back through the evolution of the project this doesn’t seem like an out of the blue, crazy announcement. Merging Remix API’s into React Router and then replacing the compiler and server with Vite didn’t leave much for Remix to do as a standalone project. 🐐 React Router - the past, present, and future of React React Router is one of the oldest, and most used packages in the React ecosystem. > Since Remix has always been effectively "React Router: The Framework", we wanted to create a bridge for all these React Router projects to be able to upgrade to Remix. With Remix being baked into React Router and now supporting SPA mode, legacy React Router applications have an easier path for migrating to the next generation of React. https://x.com/ryanflorence/status/1791488550162370709 Remix vs React 19 If you’ve taken a look at React 19 at all, it turns out it now handles a lot of the problems that Remix set out to solve in the first place. Things like Server Components, Server Actions, and Form Actions provide the same sort of programming model that Remix popularized. https://x.com/ryanflorence/status/1791484663883829258 Planned Changes for Remix and React Router Just recently, a post was published giving the exact details of what the changes to Remix and React Router will look like. tl;dr For React Router * React Router v6 to v7 will be a non-breaking upgrade * The Vite plugin from Remix is coming to React Router in v7 * The Vite plugin simply makes existing React Router features more convenient to use, but it isn't required to use React Router v7 * v7 will support both React 18 and React 19 For Remix * What would have been Remix v3 is React Router v7 * Remix v2 to React Router v7 will be a non-breaking upgrade * Remix is coming back better than ever in a future release with an incremental adoption strategy enabled by these changes For Both * React Router v7 comes with new features not in Remix or React Router today: RSC, server actions, static pre-rendering, and enhanced Type Safety across the board The show goes on I love how this project has evolved and I tip my hat to the Remix/React Router team. React Router feels like a cozy blanket in an ecosystem that is going through some major changes which feels uncertain and a little scary at times. The Remix / React Router story is still being written and I’m excited to see where it goes. I’m looking forward to seeing the work they are doing to support React Server Components. A lot of people are pretty excited about RSC’s and there is a lot of room for unique and interesting implementations. Long live React Router 🙌....

Communication Between Client Components in Next.js cover image

Communication Between Client Components in Next.js

Communication Between Client Components in Next.js In recent years, Next.js has become one of the most popular React frameworks for building server-rendered applications. With the introduction of the App Router in Next.js 13, the framework has taken a major leap forward by embracing a new approach to building web applications: the concept of server components and client components. This separation of concerns allows developers to strategically decide which parts of their application should be rendered on the server and which are then hydrated in the browser for interactivity. The Challenge: Communicating Between Client Components While server components offer numerous benefits, they also introduce a new challenge: how can client components within different boundaries communicate with each other? For instance, let's consider a scenario where you have a button (a client component) and a separate client component that displays the number of times the button has been clicked. In a regular React application, this would typically be accomplished by lifting the state to a common ancestor component, allowing the button to update the state, which is then passed down to the counter display component. However, the traditional approach may not be as straightforward in a Next.js application that heavily relies on server components, with client components scattered across the page. This blog post will explore three ways to facilitate communication between client components in Next.js, depending on where you want to store the state. Lifting State to a Common Client Component One approach to communicating between client components is to lift the state to a common client component. This could be a React context provider, a state management system like Zustand, or any other solution that allows you to share state across components. The key aspect is that this wrapper component should be higher up in the tree (perhaps even in the layout) and accept server components as children. Next.js allows you to interleave client and server components as much as you want, as long as server components are passed to client components as props or as component children. Here's how this approach might look in practice. First of all, we'd create a wrapper client component that holds the state: ` This wrapper component can be included in the layout: ` Any server components can be rendered within the layout, potentially nesting them several levels deep. Finally, we'd create two client components, one for the button and one for the counter display: ` ` The entire client and server component tree is rendered on the server, and the client components are then hydrated in the browser and initialized. From then on, the communication between the client components works just like in any regular React application. Check out the page using this pattern in the embedded Stackblitz window below: Using Query Params for State Management Another approach is to use query params instead of a wrapper client component and store the state in the URL. In this scenario, you have two client components: the button and the counter display. The counter value (the state) is stored in a query param, such as counterValue. The client components can read the current counter value using the useSearchParams hook. Once read, the useRouter hook can update the query param, effectively updating the counter value. However, there's one gotcha to this approach. If a route is statically rendered, calling useSearchParams will cause the client component tree up to the closest Suspense boundary to be client-side rendered. Next.js recommends wrapping the client component that uses useSearchParams in a boundary. Here's an example of how this approach might look. The button reads the current counter value and updates it on click by using the router's replace function: ` The counter display component is relatively simple, only reading the counter value: ` And here is the page that is a server component, hosting both of the above client components: ` Feel free to check out the above page in the embedded Stackblitz below: Storing State on the Server The third approach is to store the state on the server. In this case, the counter display component accepts the counter value as a prop, where the counter value is passed by a parent server component that reads the counter value from the database. The button component, when clicked, calls a server action that updates the counter value and calls revalidatePath() so that the counter value is refreshed, and consequently, the counter display component is re-rendered. It's worth noting that in this approach, unless you need some interactivity in the counter display component, it doesn't need to be a client component – it can be purely server-rendered. However, if both components need to be client components, here's an example of how this approach might look. First, we'll implement a server action that updates the counter value. We won't get into the mechanics of updating it, which in a real app would require a call to the database or an external API - so we're only commenting that part. After that, we revalidate the path so that the Next.js caches are purged, and the counter value is retrieved again in server components that read it. ` The button is a simple client component that calls the above server action when clicked. ` The counter display component reads the counter value from the parent: ` While the parent is a server component that reads the counter value from the database or an external API. ` This pattern can be seen in the embedded Stackblitz below: Conclusion Next.js is a powerful framework that offers various choices for implementing communication patterns between client components. Whether you lift state to a common client component, use query params for state management, or store the state on the server, Next.js provides all the tools you need to add a communication path between two separate client component boundaries. We hope this blog post has been useful in demonstrating how to facilitate communication between client components in Next.js. Check out other Next.js blog posts we've written for more insights and best practices. You can also view the entire codebase for the above snippets on StackBlitz....

Quo v[AI]dis, Tech Stack? cover image

Quo v[AI]dis, Tech Stack?

Since we've started extensively leveraging AI at This Dot to enhance development workflows and experimenting with different ways to make it as helpful as possible, there's been a creeping thought on my mind - Is AI just helping us write code faster, or is it silently reshaping what code we choose to write? Eventually, this thought led to an interesting conversation on our company's Slack about the impact of AI on our tech stack choices. Some of the views shared there included: - "The battle between static and dynamic types is over. TypeScript won." - "The fast-paced development of new frameworks and the excitement around new shiny technologies is slowing down. AI can make existing things work with a workaround in a few minutes, so why create or adopt something new?" - "AI models are more trained on the most popular stacks, so they will naturally favor those, leading to a self-reinforcing loop." - "A lot of AI coding assistants serve as marketing funnels for specific stacks, such as v0 being tailored to Next.js and Vercel or Lovable using Supabase and Clerk." All of these points are valid and interesting, but they also made me think about the bigger picture. So I decided to do some extensive research (read "I decided to make the OpenAI Deep Research tool do it for me") and summarize my findings in this article. So without further ado, here are some structured thoughts on how AI is reshaping our tech stack choices, and what it means for the future of software development. 1. LLMs as the New Developer Platform If software development is a journey, LLMs have become the new high-speed train line. Long gone are the days when we used Copilot as a fancy autocomplete tool. Don't get me wrong, it was mind-bogglingly good when it first came out, and I've used it extensively. But now, a few years later, LLMs have evolved into something much more powerful. With the rise of tools like Cursor, Windsurf, Roo Code, or Claude Code, LLMs are essentially becoming the new developer platform. They are no longer just a helper that autocompletes a switch statement or a function signature, but a full-fledged platform that can generate entire applications, write tests, and even refactor code. And it is not just a few evangelists or early adopters who are using these tools. They have become mainstream, with millions of developers relying on them daily. According to Deloitte, nearly 20% of devs in tech firms were already using generative AI coding tools by 2024, with 76% of StackOverflow respondents using or planning to use AI tools in their development process, according to the 2024 StackOverflow Developer Survey. They've become an integral part of the development workflow, mediating how code is written, reviewed, and learned. I've argued in the past that LLMs are becoming a new layer of abstraction in software development, but now I believe they are evolving into something even more powerful - a new developer platform that is shaping how we think about and approach software development. 2. The Reinforcement Loop: Popular Stacks Get Smarter As we travel this AI-guided road, we find that certain routes become highways, while others lead to narrow paths or even dead ends. AI tools are not just helping us write code faster; they are also shaping our preferences for certain tech stacks. The most popular frameworks and languages, such as React.js on the frontend and Node.js on the backend (both with 40% adoption), are the ones that AI tools perform best with. Their increasing popularity is not just a coincidence; it's a result of a self-reinforcing loop. AI models are trained on vast amounts of code, and the most popular stacks naturally have more data available for training, given their widespread use, leading to more questions, answers, and examples in the training data. This means that AI tools are inherently better at understanding and generating code for these stacks. As an anecdotal example, I've noticed that AI tools tend to suggest React.js even when I specify a preference for another framework. As someone working with multiple tech stacks, I can attest that AI tools are significantly more effective with React.js or Node.js than, say, Yii2 or CakePHP. This phenomenon is not limited to just one or two stacks; it applies to the entire ecosystem. The more a stack is used, the more data there is for AI to learn from, and the better it gets at generating code for that stack, resulting in a feedback loop: 1. AI performs better on popular stacks. 2. Popular stacks get more adoption as developers find them easier to work with. 3. More developers using those stacks means more data for AI to learn from. 4. The cycle continues, reinforcing the popularity of those stacks. The issue is maybe even more evident with CSS frameworks. TailwindCSS, for example, has gained immense popularity thanks to its utility-first approach, which aligns well with AI's ability to generate and manipulate styles. As more developers adopt TailwindCSS, AI tools become better at understanding its conventions and generating appropriate styles, further driving its adoption. However, the Tailwind CSS example also highlights a potential pitfall of this reinforcement loop. Tailwind CSS v4 was released in January 2025. From my experience, AI tools still attempt to generate code using v3 concepts and often need to be reminded to use Tailwind CSS v4, requiring spoon-feeding with documentation to get it right. Effectively, this phenomenon can lead to a situation where AI tools not only reinforce the popularity of certain stacks but also potentially slow down the adoption of newer versions or alternatives. 3. Frontend Acceleration: React, Angular, and Beyond Navigating the frontend landscape has always been tricky, but with AI, some paths feel like smooth expressways while others remain bumpy dirt roads. AI is particularly transformative in frontend development, where the complexity and boilerplate code can be overwhelming. Established frameworks like React and Angular, which are already popular, are seeing even more adoption due to AI's ability to generate components, tests, and optimizations. React's widespread adoption and its status as the most popular framework on the frontend make it the go-to choice for many developers, especially with AI tools that can quickly scaffold new components or entire applications. However, Angular's strict structure and type safety also make it a strong contender. Angular's opinionated nature can actually benefit AI-generated code, as it provides a clear framework for the AI to follow, reducing ambiguity and potential bugs. > Call me crazy but I think that long term Angular is going to work better with AI tools for frontend work. > > More strict rules to follow, easier to build and scale. Just like for humans. > > We just need to keep Angular opinionated enough. > > — Daniel Glejzner on X But it's not just about how the frameworks are structured; it's also the documentation they provide. It has recently become the norm for frameworks to have AI-friendly documentation. Angular, for instance, has a llms.txt file that you can reference in your AI prompts to get more relevant results. The best example, however, in my opinion, is the Nuxt.ui documentation, which provides the option to copy each documentation page as markdown or a link to its markdown version, making it easy to reference in AI prompts. Frameworks that incorporate AI-friendly documentation and tooling are likely to experience increased adoption, as they facilitate developers' ability to leverage AI's capabilities. 4. Full-Stack TS/JS: The Sweet Spot On this AI-accelerated journey, some stacks have emerged as the smoothest rides, and full-stack JavaScript/TypeScript is leading the way. The combination of React on the frontend and Node.js on the backend provides a unified language ecosystem, making the road less bumpy for developers. Shared types, common tooling, and mature libraries enable faster prototyping and reduced context switching. AI seems to enjoy these well-paved highways too. I've observed numerous instances where AI tools default to suggesting Next.js and Tailwind CSS for new projects, even when users are prompted otherwise. While you can force a slight detour to something like Nuxt or SvelteKit, the road suddenly gets patchier - AI becomes less confident, requires more hand-holding, and sometimes outright stalls. So while still technically being in the sweet spot of full-stack JavaScript/TypeScript, deviating from the "main highway" even slightly can lead to a much rougher ride. React-based full-stack frameworks are becoming mainstream, not necessarily because they are always the best solution, but because they are the path of least resistance for both humans and AI. 5. The Polyglot Shift: AI Enables Multilingual Devs One fascinating development on this journey is how AI is enabling more developers to become polyglots. Where switching stacks used to feel like taking detours into unknown territory, AI now acts like an on-demand guide. Whether it’s switching from Laravel to Spring Boot or from Angular to Svelte, AI helps bridge those knowledge gaps quickly. At This Dot, we've always taken pride in our polyglot approach, but AI is lowering the barriers for everyone. Yes, we've done this before the rise of AI tooling. If you are an experienced engineer with a strong understanding of programming concepts, you'll be able to adapt to different stacks and projects quickly. But AI is now enabling even junior developers to become polyglots, and it's making it even easier for the experienced ones to switch between stacks seamlessly. AI doesn’t just shorten the journey - it makes more destinations accessible. This "AI boost" not only facilitates the job of a software consultant, such as myself, who often has to switch between different projects, but it also opens the door to unlimited possibilities for companies to mix and match stacks based on their needs - particularly useful for companies that have diverse tech stacks, as it allows them to leverage the strengths of different languages and frameworks without the steep learning curve that usually comes with it. 6. AI-Generated Stack Bundles: The Trojan Horse > Trend I'm seeing: AI app generators are a sales funnel. > > -Chef uses Convex. > > -V0 is optimized for Vercel. > > -Lovable uses Supabase and Clerk. > > -Firebase Studio uses Google services. > > These tools act like a trojan horse - they "sell" a tech stack. > > Choose wisely. > > — Cory House on X Some roads come pre-built, but with toll booths you may not notice until you're halfway through the trip. AI-generated apps from tools like v0, Firebase Studio, or Lovable are convenience highways - fast, smooth, and easy to follow - but they quietly nudge you toward specific tech stacks, backend services, databases, and deployment platforms. It's a smart business model. These tools don't just scaffold your app; they bundle in opinions on hosting, auth providers, and DB layers. The convenience is undeniable, but there's a trade-off in flexibility and long-term maintainability. Engineering leaders must stay alert, like seasoned navigators, ensuring that the allure of speed doesn't lead their teams down the alleyways of vendor lock-in. 7. From 'Buy vs Build' to 'Prompt vs Buy' The classic dilemma used to be _“buy vs build”_ - now it’s becoming “prompt vs buy.” Why pay for a bloated tour bus of a SaaS product, packed with destinations and detours you’ll never take (and priced accordingly), when you can chart a custom route with a few well-crafted prompts and have a lightweight internal tool up and running in days—or even hours? Do you need a simple tool to track customer contacts with a few custom fields and a clean interface? In the past, you might have booked a seat on the nearest SaaS solution - one that gets you close enough to your destination but comes with unnecessary stops and baggage. With AI, you can now skip the crowded bus altogether and build a tailor-made vehicle that drives exactly where you need to go, no more, no less. AI reshapes the travel map of product development. The road to MVPs has become faster, cheaper, and more direct. This shift is already rerouting the internal tooling landscape, steering companies away from bulky, one-size-fits-all platforms toward lean, AI-assembled solutions. And over time, it may change not just _how_ we build, but _where_ we build - with the smoothest highways forming around AI-friendly, modular ecosystems like Node, React, and TypeScript, while older “corporate” expressways like .NET, Java, or even Angular risk becoming the slow scenic routes of enterprise tech. 8. Strategic Implications: Velocity vs Maintainability Every shortcut comes with trade-offs. The fast lane that AI offers boosts productivity but can sometimes encourage shortcuts in architecture and design. Speeding to your destination is great - until you hit the maintenance toll booth further down the road. AI tooling makes it easier to throw together an MVP, but without experienced oversight, the resulting codebases can turn into spaghetti highways. Teams need to implement AI-era best practices: structured code reviews, prompt hygiene, and deliberate stack choices that prioritize long-term maintainability over short-term convenience. Failing to do so can lead to a "quick and dirty" mentality, where the focus is on getting things done fast rather than building robust, maintainable solutions, which is particularly concerning for companies that rely on in-house developers or junior teams who may not have the experience to recognize potential pitfalls in AI-generated code. 9. Closing Reflection: Are We Still Choosing Our Stacks? So, where are we heading? Looking at the current "traffic" on the modern software development pathways, one thing becomes clear: AI isn't just a productivity tool - the roads themselves are starting to shape the journey. What was once a deliberate process of choosing the right vehicle for the right terrain - picking our stacks based on product goals, team expertise, and long-term maintainability - now feels more like following GPS directions that constantly recalculate to the path of least resistance. AI is repaving the main routes, widening the lanes for certain tech stacks, and putting up "scenic route" signs for some frameworks while leaving others on neglected backroads. This doesn't mean we've lost control of the steering wheel, but it does mean that the map is changing beneath us in ways that are easy to overlook. The risk is clear: we may find ourselves taking the smoothest on-ramps without ever asking if they lead to where we actually want to go. Convenience can quietly take priority over appropriateness. Productivity gains in the short term can pave over technical debt potholes that become unavoidable down the road. But the story isn't entirely one of caution. There's a powerful opportunity here too. With AI as a co-pilot, we can explore more destinations than ever before - venturing into unfamiliar tech stacks, accelerating MVP development, or rapidly prototyping ideas that previously seemed out of reach. The key is to remain intentional about when to cruise with AI autopilot and when to take the wheel with both hands and steer purposefully. In this new era of AI-shaped development, the question every engineering team should be asking is not just "how fast can we go?" but "are we on the right road?" and "who's really choosing our route?" And let’s not forget — some of these roads are still being built. Open-source maintainers and framework authors play a pivotal role in shaping which paths become highways. By designing AI-friendly architectures, providing structured, machine-readable documentation, and baking in patterns that are easy for AI models to learn and suggest, they can guide where AI directs traffic. Frameworks that proactively optimize for AI tooling aren’t just improving developer experience — they’re shaping the very flow of adoption in this AI-accelerated landscape. If we're not mindful, we risk becoming passengers on a journey defined by default choices. However, if we remain vigilant, we can utilize AI to create more accurate maps, not just follow the fastest roads, but also chart new ones. Because while the routes may be getting redrawn, the destination should always be ours to choose. In the end, the real competitive advantage will belong to those who can harness AI's speed while keeping their hands firmly on the wheel - navigating not by ease, but by purpose. In this new era, the most valuable skill may not be prompt engineering - it might be strategic discernment....

AI Is Speeding Up Development. But Where Are the New Bottlenecks? cover image

AI Is Speeding Up Development. But Where Are the New Bottlenecks?

AI is accelerating development, but it’s also exposing everything else that’s broken. At the Leadership Exchange, leaders unpacked how AI is reshaping the SDLC and what organizations need to address beyond just coding to make adoption successful. Moderated by Rob Ocel, VP of Innovation at This Dot Labs, the panel featured Itai Gerchikov at Anthropic and Harald Kirschner, Principal Product Manager for GitHub Copilot & VS Code at Microsoft. Panelists explored the current state of AI adoption across the software development lifecycle and shared practical insights into how organizations can effectively integrate AI tools. Panelists discussed how companies are investing in AI tools, skills, and managed competency programs to support developers. While AI can dramatically accelerate coding, the panel emphasized that adoption affects every stage of the SDLC. Bottlenecks now appear in testing, DevOps, product delivery, and marketing as AI speeds up development. Organizations that address technical debt and process inefficiencies are better positioned to extract maximum value from AI tools. The conversation also focused on opportunities and risks. Security, governance, and workforce education were highlighted as critical factors for adoption. Panelists stressed that AI initiatives should be aligned with broader business goals rather than pursued in isolation. They noted that companies experimenting at the cutting edge need to consider organizational readiness just as carefully as technical capabilities. Panelists also explored how leading organizations are navigating the early stages of adoption. Those ahead of the curve are using structured experimentation, prioritizing process improvements, and continuously evaluating outcomes to refine their AI strategies. Learning from these early adopters allows other organizations to anticipate emerging trends and prepare for the next phase of AI adoption rather than simply replicating past approaches. Key Takeaways - Investing in AI skills and tools should be done thoughtfully, with clear alignment to business objectives. - Examining the full SDLC helps identify bottlenecks that AI may accelerate or expose. - Organizations can gain a competitive advantage by learning from early adopters and planning for where AI adoption is heading. AI adoption is not just a technical initiative; it is a strategic transformation that requires attention to people, process, and technology. Organizations that balance innovation with operational discipline will be best positioned to capture the full potential of AI across the software lifecycle. Seeing similar challenges in your own SDLC? Let’s compare notes. Join us at an upcoming Leadership Exchange or reach out to continue the conversation. Tracy can be reached at tlee@thisdot.co....

Let's innovate together!

We're ready to be your trusted technical partners in your digital innovation journey.

Whether it's modernization or custom software solutions, our team of experts can guide you through best practices and how to build scalable, performant software that lasts.

Prefer email? hi@thisdot.co