> more/better in the same time used in the past — which is what I do), when left alone with nontrivial goals they tend to produce fragile code bases that are larger than needed, complex, full of local minima choices, suboptimal in many ways.
And this part felt like a "bitter lesson" anti-pattern:
> Avoid any RAG that will show only part of the code / context to the LLM. This destroys LLMs performance. You must be in control of what the LLM can see when providing a reply.
Ultimately I think cli agents like claude-code and gemini-cli and aider will be controlling the context dynamically, and the human should not be spending premature optimization time on this activity.
If anyone's interested I've got some very exact stats on prompts and accepted solution linked in my LLM proof of concept repo: https://github.com/sutt/agro/blob/master/docs/dev-summary-v1...