←back to thread

170 points mogambo1 | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
jonstewart ◴[] No.45289784[source]
I first tried getting specific with Claude Code. I made the Claude.md, I detailed how to do TDD, what steps it should take, the commands it should run. It was imperfect. Then I had it plan (think hard) and write the plan to a file. I’d clear context, have it read the plan, ask me questions, and then have it decompose the plan into a detailed plan of discrete tasks. Have it work its way through that. It would inevitably go sideways halfway through, even clearing context between each task. It wouldn’t run tests, it would commit breakage, it would flip flop between two different broken approaches, it was just awful. Now I’ve just been vibing, writing as little as possible and seeing what happens. That sucks, too.

It’s amazing at reviewing code. It will identify what you fear, the horrors that lie within the codebase, and it’ll bring them out into the sunlight and give you a 7 step plan for fixing them. And the coding model is good, it can write a function. But it can’t follow a plan worth shit. And if I have to be extremely detailed at the function by function level, then I should be in the editor coding. Claude code is an amazing niche tool for code reviews and dialogue and debugging and coping with new technologies and tools, but it is not a productivity enhancement for daily coding.

replies(2): >>45289842 #>>45296208 #
liszper ◴[] No.45289842[source]
With all due respect, you sound like someone who is just getting familiar with these tools. 100 more hours spent with AI coding and you will be much more productive. Coding with AI is a slightly different skill from coding, similar how managing software engineers is different from writing software.
replies(5): >>45289916 #>>45289919 #>>45290450 #>>45292395 #>>45295410 #
abtinf ◴[] No.45289919[source]
liszper:

> most SWE folks still have no idea how big the difference is between the coding agents they tried a year ago and declared as useless and chatgpt 5 paired with Codex or Cursor today

Also liszper: oh, you tried the current approach and don’t agree with me? Well you just don’t know what you are doing.

replies(4): >>45290124 #>>45290154 #>>45290776 #>>45327451 #
1. pjc50 ◴[] No.45290124[source]
Funnily enough the same kind of approach you get from Lisp advocates and the more annoying faction of Linux advocacy (which isn't as prevalent these days, it seems)
replies(2): >>45290161 #>>45292570 #
2. liszper ◴[] No.45290161[source]
I'm also a lisper, yes.
3. klibertp ◴[] No.45292570[source]
> the same kind of approach you get from Lisp

In what way? Lisp (Common Lisp) is the most stable and unchanging language out there. If you learned it anytime after the late 80s, you still know it, and will know it until the end of time. Meanwhile, here, we hear that "a year ago" is so much time that everything changed (for the better, of course).

Or is it about needing some serious time investment to get comfortable with Lisp? Even then, once you do spend enough time that s-exprs stop being a problem, that's it; there's nothing else to be getting comfortable with, and certainly, you won't need to relearn any of that a year into the future.

I don't think AI coding and Lisp are comparable, even considering just the tone of messages on the topic (as far as I can see, "smug lisp weenies" are a thing of the ancient past).