←back to thread

925 points dmitrybrant | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
theptip ◴[] No.45163517[source]
A good case study. I have found these two to be good categories of win:

> Use these tools as a massive force multiplier of your own skills.

Claude definitely makes me more productive in frameworks I know well, where I can scan and pattern-match quickly on the boilerplate parts.

> Use these tools for rapid onboarding onto new frameworks.

I’m also more productive here, this is an enabler to explore new areas, and is also a boon at big tech companies where there are just lots of tech stacks and frameworks in use.

I feel there is an interesting split forming in ability to gauge AI capabilities - it kinda requires you to be on top of a rapidly-changing firehose of techniques and frameworks. If you haven’t spent 100 hours with Claude Code / Claude 4.0 you likely don’t have an accurate picture of its capabilities.

“Enables non-coders to vibe code their way into trouble” might be the median scenario on X, but it’s not so relevant to what expert coders will experience if they put the time in.

replies(16): >>45163642 #>>45163857 #>>45163954 #>>45163957 #>>45164146 #>>45164186 #>>45165282 #>>45165556 #>>45166441 #>>45166708 #>>45167115 #>>45167361 #>>45168913 #>>45169267 #>>45178891 #>>45193900 #
bicx ◴[] No.45163642[source]
This is a good takeaway. I use Claude Code as my main approach for making changes to a codebase, and I’ve been doing so every day for months. I have a solid system I follow through trial and error, and overall it’s been a massive boon to my productivity and willingness to attempt larger experiments.

One thing I love doing is developing a strong underlying data structure, schema, and internal API, then essentially having CC often one-shot a great UI for internal tools.

Being able to think at a higher level beyond grunt work and framework nuances is a game-changer for my career of 16 years.

replies(3): >>45163945 #>>45168650 #>>45178896 #
kccqzy ◴[] No.45163945[source]
This is more of a reflection of how our profession has not meaningfully advanced. OP talks about boilerplate. You talk about grunt work. We now have AI to do these things for us. But why do such things need to exist in the first place? Why hasn't there been a minimal-boilerplate language and framework and programming environment? Why haven't we collectively emphasized the creation of new tools to reduce boilerplate and grunt work?
replies(20): >>45163980 #>>45163984 #>>45163986 #>>45163988 #>>45164135 #>>45164160 #>>45164367 #>>45164431 #>>45164851 #>>45165100 #>>45165366 #>>45165709 #>>45166197 #>>45166665 #>>45166912 #>>45170253 #>>45171572 #>>45171850 #>>45174629 #>>45176581 #
zipzapzip ◴[] No.45165100[source]
Because of the obsession with backwards compatibility and not breaking code. The web development industry is the prime example. HTML, Javascript, CSS, a backend frontend architecture - absolutely terrible stack.
replies(2): >>45165243 #>>45165705 #
lenkite ◴[] No.45165705[source]
I don't even know why things like templating and inclusion are not just part of the core web stack (ideally declaratively with no JS). There should be no need for an external tool or build process or third-party framework.
replies(1): >>45166892 #
skydhash ◴[] No.45166892{3}[source]
Html is rendered document. It’s ok to write it if you only need one document, but it’s better to use an actual template language or some generators if you’re going to have the same layout and components for many pages.

You’re asking to shift this job from the editor (you) to the viewer (the browser).

replies(1): >>45168535 #
lenkite ◴[] No.45168535{4}[source]
Maybe it was a "viewer" in the 90s. The viewer is not a viewer - it is a full fledged application runtime that has a developer environment and media stack, along with several miscellaneous runtimes. A standard template language and document inclusion feature is very small peanuts compared to that. A teeny house compared to the galaxy already built-in - with several planets worth of features being added yearly.
replies(1): >>45170906 #
cestith ◴[] No.45170906{5}[source]
You both make good points, and I come down on the side of adding some template mechanism to web standards. Of course, that all starts with an RFC and a reference implementation. Any volunteers?
replies(1): >>45174756 #
1. lenkite ◴[] No.45174756{6}[source]
Would raise my hand to volunteer for the reference implementation. I guess it would need to be in C++/Rust ? RFC, however, involves way too much talking and also needs solid networking amongst the web crowd. Not qualified for that. For a template language, it would be better to copy a subset from an existing de-facto standard like jinja2 which already has a lean, performant subset implementation at https://github.com/Keats/tera.

Document/template inclusion model should be OK now in modern era thanks to HTTP/3. Not really sure how that should ideally look like though.