I like the distinction between imperative and declarative styles, but I still use imperative chat sessions to work through what the declarative plan should look like. I feel like this approach loses that.
Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
71–80 of 178 posts
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#72Another LLM could use the pseudocode to generate black box test cases without access to the generated code. How to define the API between tests and the implementation would require some more work.
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#73You could write that pseudocode as a prompt for the agent and get the same result. Use plan mode to understand what agent wants to do.
Am i missing anything?
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#74I've settled into a habit of asking codex to write down summary of key decisions in a ledger as I end a unit of work. It keeps iterating natural but maintains a system of record on decisions in the same repo. The "ledger" is the new code.
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#75I'm not sold on the pseudocode approach, but I agree with the declarative aspect. Declarative specs have become central to my process and I've built this tool to support it:
https://github.com/spekk-ai/spekk-cli
Rather than writing exhaustive specs, I preserve only the intent and what must be true as discrete assertions. This preserves the leverage you get from LLMs - anything it can reliably infer does not need to be specified. It also (mostly) separates intent from code or architecture decisions, which keeps specs flexible.
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#76I think the reverse direction is more important: taking a massive complex problem/codebase and decomposing it to short pseudocode. Then you could edit the pseudocode and compile it back into the system. That's the way software engineers working on large projects work anyway: you first gather context on the state of the system and read it at a level you can understand. Then you propose a change on the simplified repre…
I'm working on a bidirectional version of this! The big challenge is keeping the various versions of the thing in sync through edits.
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#77Are you using Huzzah to development Huzzah? :)
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#78I think its an interesting approach, much more than most other new agent harnesses at least.
I guess you still need the chat to discuss with the AI? For example, ask it to compare solution A and B, or to explain how to do X. A bit like you can use plan mode today. Then given the result, you can write the hz file (or even have an agent write it).
But I wonder how it works on a more complicated project than fizzbuzz. Can I suggest you use Huzzah to develop itself, and then share the hz file(s)? That will show both how it works on a more complicated project, and something that is developing over time.
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#79I've settled into a habit of asking codex to write down summary of key decisions in a ledger as I end a unit of work. It keeps iterating natural but maintains a system of record on decisions in the same repo. The "ledger" is the new code.
I believe these are called Architectural Decision Records. Matt Pocock's skills [0] make use of them. They're one of the more useful things I've gotten out them.
Re: Show HN: Huzzah – a novel approach to coding with AI
#80I think you’re probably missing why it’s exhausting. The problem is not writing English, it’s the rate of change. Programming is meditative, it is a thinking process, the code you output is an artifact of your thinking. Agent-based development… there is no thinking, no meditation, you’re delegating the thinking to a machine, you’re just barking what you want at it, incessantly, endlessly. For businesses it makes sens…
I would disagree that there is no thinking. I think a strong understanding of the fundamentals of coding are still wildly important to get good quality code, and a big part of that is thinking or reasoning through a particular problem. It’s just now we have a way of using common language in order for that to happen instead of having to learn or keep up with every new tool and framework in order to do so. The new prog…
I don’t mean to imply that making things with these tools is lesser, or that it doesn’t require some skill, but it is fundamentally different to programming. I’m glad you’re able to bring new things to life with these tools, that’s a great thing :)
My broader philosophical take is that we, programmers, lived through a golden age where our skills used on our terms were some of the most valuable skills. The golden age is over, our skills aren’t useless, they can still be applied to making things with modern tools, but it is no longer on our terms, no longer programming, no longer the meditative thinking process it once was.
For non-programmers, this is their golden age, the reign of programmer tyranny is over.