Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Sonnet 4.5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#191

Post by rapind »

TrainedMonkey wrote: post #43
cellis wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opposite for me…5-codex high ran out of tokens extremely quickly and didn’t adhere as well to the agents.md as Claude did to the Claude.md, perhaps because it insists on writing extremely complicated bash scripts or whole python programs to execute what should be simple commands.

Codex was a miserable experience for me until I learned to compact after every feature. Now it is a cut above CC, although the latter still has an edge at TODO scaffolding and planning.

I don't even compact, I just start from scratch whenever I get down below 40%, if I can. I've found Codex can get back up to speed pretty well.

I like to have it come up with a detailed plan in a markdown doc, work on a branch, and commit often. Seems not to have any issues getting back on task.

Obviously subjective take based on the work I'm doing, but I found context management to be way worse with Claude Code. In fact I felt like context management was taking up half of my time with CC and hated that. Like I was always worried about it, so it was taking up space in my brain. I never got a chance to play with CC's new 1m context though, so that might be a thing of the past.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#192

Post by boogieknite »

cloverich wrote: post #108

Please y'all, when you list supportive or critical complaints based on your actual work, include some specifics of the task and prompt. Like actual prompt, actual bugs, actual feature, etc. I've had great success with both ChatGPT and Claude for years, am around 3x sustained output increase in my professional work, and kicking off and finishing new side projects / features that I used to simply not ever finish. BUT t…

> for example Claude code could not seem to stitch together three screens in an iOS app using the latest SwiftUI

have you tried in the new xcode extension? that tool is surprisingly good in my limited use. one of the few times xcode has impressed me in my 2 yeasrs of use. read some anecdotes that claude in the xcode tool is more accurate than standard claude code for Swift. i havent noticed that myself but only used the xcode tool twice so far

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#193

Post by bartread »

cloverich wrote: post #108

Please y'all, when you list supportive or critical complaints based on your actual work, include some specifics of the task and prompt. Like actual prompt, actual bugs, actual feature, etc. I've had great success with both ChatGPT and Claude for years, am around 3x sustained output increase in my professional work, and kicking off and finishing new side projects / features that I used to simply not ever finish. BUT t…

I had a complete shocker with all of Claude, GitHub Copilot, and ChatGPT when trying to prototype an iOS app in Swift around 12 months ago. They would all really struggle to generate anything usable, and making any progress was incredibly slow due to all the problems I was running into.

This was in stark contrast to my experience with TypeScript/NextJS, Python, and C#. Most of the time output quality for these was at least usefully good. Occasionally you’d get stuck in a tarpit of bullshit/hallucination around anything very new that hadn’t been in the training dataset for the model release you were using.

My take: there simply isn’t the community, thought leadership, and sheer volume of content around Swift that there is around these other languages. This means both lower quantity and lower quality of training data for Swift as compared to these other languages.

And that, unfortunately, plays negatively into the quality of LLM output for app development in Swift.

(Anyone who knows better, feel free to shoot me down.)

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#195

Post by lisbbb »

stavros wrote: post #183
Mathiciann wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am almost convinced your comment is parody but I am not entirely sure. You want proof for critical/supportive criticism? Then almost in the same sentence you make an insane claim without backing this up by any evidence.

Well, here's an even more insane claim: I'm infinity times more productive, as I just wouldn't even start projects without the LLM to sidestep my ADHD. Then, when the LLM invariably fucks up, I step in and finish things myself! Here are a few projects that I made these past few months that wouldn't have been possible without LLMs: * https://github.com/skorokithakis/dracula - A simple blood test viewer. * https://www.…

Did you make any money off any of that or was it all just labors of love type of stuff? I'm enjoying woodworking...

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#196

Post by emp17344 »

stavros wrote: post #183
Mathiciann wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am almost convinced your comment is parody but I am not entirely sure. You want proof for critical/supportive criticism? Then almost in the same sentence you make an insane claim without backing this up by any evidence.

Well, here's an even more insane claim: I'm infinity times more productive, as I just wouldn't even start projects without the LLM to sidestep my ADHD. Then, when the LLM invariably fucks up, I step in and finish things myself! Here are a few projects that I made these past few months that wouldn't have been possible without LLMs: * https://github.com/skorokithakis/dracula - A simple blood test viewer. * https://www.…

> I'm infinity times more productive, as I just wouldn't even start projects without the LLM to sidestep my ADHD.

1 is not infinitely greater than 0.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#197

Post by itsoktocry »

rudedogg wrote: post #70

I just ran this through a simple change I’ve asked Sonnet 4 and Opus 4.1, and it fails too. It’s a simple substitution request where I provide a Lint error that suggests the correct change. All the models fail. I could ask someone with no development experience to do this change and they could. I worry everyone is chasing benchmarks to the detriment of general performance. Or the next token weight for the incorrect c…

>It’s a simple substitution request where I provide a Lint error that suggests the correct change. All the models fail. I could ask someone with no development experience to do this change and they could.

I don't understand why this kind of thing is useful. Do the thing yourself and move on. For every one problem like this, AI can do 10 better/faster than I can.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#198

Post by scrollaway »

emp17344 wrote: post #172
senordevnyc wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is such a negative and cynical place these days that it's just not worth it. I just don't have the patience to hear yet another anti-AI rant, or have someone who is ideologically opposed to AI nitpick its output. Like you, I've found AI to be a huge help for my work, and I'm happy to keep outcompeting the people who are too stubborn to approach it with an open mind.

[flagged]

GP is right, though. Many programming communities, including (in some threads, but not all) HN, have become ridiculous anti-AI bubbles - what's the point of trying to have a discussion if you're going to get systematically shut down by people whose entire premise is that they don't use it? It's like trying to explain color to the blind.

What "discussion" do you want to have? Another round of "LLMs are terrible at embedded hardware programming ergo they're useless"? Maybe with a dash of "LLMs don't write bug-free software [but I do]" to close it off?

The discussions that are at all advancing the state of the art are happening on forums that accept reality as a matter of fact, without people constantly trying to constantly pretend things because they're worried they'll lose their job if they don't.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#199

Post by yepyip »

peterdstallion wrote: post #157

I am a paying subscriber to Gemini, Claude and OpenAI. I don't know if it's me, but over the last few weeks I've got to the conclusion ChatGPT is very strongly leading the race. Every answer it gives me is better - it's more concise and more informative. I look forward to testing this further, but out of the few runs I just did after reading about this - it isn't looking much better

What about Grok, are they catching up?
Post reply on HN