Live data from Hacker News

Focus and Context and LLMs

taras.glek.net

21–30 of 51 posts

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#21

The article summed itself up as 'Context is everything". But the article itself also makes the point that a human assistant was also necessary. That's gonna be my take away.

I agree. And the real lede was buried here IMO:

> This is the single most impressive code-gen project I’ve seen so far. I did not think this was possible yet.

To get that sort of acclaim, a human had to build an embedded programming language from scratch to get to that point. And even with all that effort, the agent itself took $631 and 119 hours to complete the task. I actually don't think this is a knock on the idea at all, this is the direction I think most engineers should be thinking about.

That agent-built HTTP/2 server they're referencing is apparently the only example of this sort of output they've seen to date. But if you're active in this particular space, especially on the open source side of the fence, this kind of work is everywhere. But since they don't manifest themselves as super generic tooling that you can apply to broad task domains as a turnkey solution, they don't get much attention.

I've continually held the line that if any given LLM agent platform works well for your use case and you haven't built said agent platform yourself, the underlying problem likely isn't that hard or complex. For the hard problems, you gotta do some first-principles engineering to make these tools work for you.

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#23
post #13

This article is knocking down a very expansive claim that most serious (ie: not vibe-coding) developers aren't making. Their point is that LLM agents have not yet reached the point where they can finish a complicated job end-to-end, and that if you want to do a completely hands-off project, where only the LLM generates any code, it takes a lot of prompting effort to accomplish. This seems true, right now! But in buil…

It’s almost like unrealistic expectations of LLMs driven by those working for companies who have something to gain by labeling any skepticism as “crazy” does significant damage to our perception of it’s usefulness.

Believe it or not I agree.

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#24

I don't know why software engineers think that LLM coding ability is purpose made for them to use, and because it sort of sucks at it, it therefore useless... It's like listening to professional translators endlessly lament about translation software and all it's short comings and pitfalls, while totally missing that the software is primarily used for property managers wanting to ask the landscapers to cut the grass…

> LLMs are excellent at

Writing hint: Your last paragraph stands well on its own. Especially if this is, in fact, your actual experience.

Nothing in that paragraph requires the negativity or inaccuracies of the preceding two paragraphs.

There should be a name for the human tendency (we have all done/do it) to weigh down good points with unnecessary and often inaccurate contrast/competition.

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#25
post #19

Has the author tried Claude Code? It’s the first useful “agent” (LLM in a loop + tools) that I’ve tried. IME it is hard to explain why it’s better than e.g. Aider or Cursor, but once you try it you’ll migrate your workflow pretty quickly.

It can get surprisingly dumb surprisingly fast. Today I spent easily half an hour trying to make it solve a layout issue it itself introduced when porting a component. It was a complex port it executed perfectly. And then it completely failed to even create a simple wrapper that fixed a flexbox issue. BTW. Claude (Code and Cursor) is over-indexed on "let's randomly add and remove h-full/overflow-auto and pretend it w…

I've found that CSS is among one of the more terrible things for an LLM to work on.

It's definitely on point with some strategic layout items, flexbox, etc., but when it comes to anything like colors, margins, padding, typeface, borders, etc., you might as well be throwing darts into the void.

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#26

What are some startups that help precisely with “feeding the LLM the right context” ?

Is that really a product? I think it should be solved through workflow and policies rather than providing this to a 3rd party provider. But I might be wrong.

[1] https://jdsemrau.substack.com/p/memory-and-context

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#27
post #13

This article is knocking down a very expansive claim that most serious (ie: not vibe-coding) developers aren't making. Their point is that LLM agents have not yet reached the point where they can finish a complicated job end-to-end, and that if you want to do a completely hands-off project, where only the LLM generates any code, it takes a lot of prompting effort to accomplish. This seems true, right now! But in buil…

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Let's repeat this process for 100 coding examples and see how many it can complete "hands-off" especially where (a) it isn't a case of here is a spec and I need you to implement it and (b) it isn't for a a use for which there is already publicly available code.

Otherwise your claim of "this seems true, right now!" is baseless.

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#28
post #13

This article is knocking down a very expansive claim that most serious (ie: not vibe-coding) developers aren't making. Their point is that LLM agents have not yet reached the point where they can finish a complicated job end-to-end, and that if you want to do a completely hands-off project, where only the LLM generates any code, it takes a lot of prompting effort to accomplish. This seems true, right now! But in buil…

The plural of anecdote is not data. Let's repeat this process for 100 coding examples and see how many it can complete "hands-off" especially where (a) it isn't a case of here is a spec and I need you to implement it and (b) it isn't for a a use for which there is already publicly available code. Otherwise your claim of "this seems true, right now!" is baseless.

I can't tell if you're saying I'm being too generous towards LLMs or too skeptical.

Re: Focus and Context and LLMs

#30
post #13

This article is knocking down a very expansive claim that most serious (ie: not vibe-coding) developers aren't making. Their point is that LLM agents have not yet reached the point where they can finish a complicated job end-to-end, and that if you want to do a completely hands-off project, where only the LLM generates any code, it takes a lot of prompting effort to accomplish. This seems true, right now! But in buil…

It’s almost like unrealistic expectations of LLMs driven by those working for companies who have something to gain by labeling any skepticism as “crazy” does significant damage to our perception of it’s usefulness. Believe it or not I agree.

I'm sorry, I read this comment like 3 times and I still don't understand what it's trying to say. Who are the companies you're talking about and are they too positive on LLMs or too negative?
Post reply on HN