←back to thread

23 points nocobot | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.305s | source

I tend to be sceptical when it comes to LLM based coding tools but many people seem to be raving about huge productivity gains which I wouldn’t mind as well.

However when trying cc it left me vey disappointed. For context I’m working on a relatively greenfield rust project and gave it tasks that I would consider appropriate for a junior level colleague like:

- change the return type of a trait and all it’s impls

- refactor duplicate code into a helper function

- replace some of our code with an external crate

it didn’t get any of them correct and took a very long time. Am I using the tool wrong?

How are you using cc or other agentic tools?

1. bGl2YW5j ◴[] No.44550300[source]
Also feeling let down by it.

Have been using it to build a DSL in JS. Greenfield. I’ve followed the commonly touted “plan, act, evaluate” approach; I’ve got it to generate a clear project vision, scope, and feature checklist. Then told it to refer to that for context. I’ve been descriptive and explicit in my prompting, way more so than previously.

It has gotten the broad strokes right, I’ve got an exceptionally barebones DSL, made up of 5 entities, working…just.

It has now started to spin its wheels on small issues and can’t fix them without breaking something else. The codebase isn’t even big (~8 main functions across a few files). Troubleshooting the code is difficult because it’s convoluted and I lack the same intuition for it I would have had I written it myself. I’ve decided to rewrite everything with less control ceded to the LLM.

When it works, it feels great. When it doesn’t, which is often, the spell is broken and I feel I’ve wasted a bunch of time and have not much to show for it.