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

Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 278 posts

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#191

Post by duskdozer »

sarchertech wrote: post #181
knes wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what if you move from reviewing the code to reviewing the spec?

That’s like asking why don’t we switch from reviewing PRs to reviewing jira tickets. There’s probably a world where you could do that if the spec was written in a formal language with no ambiguity and there was a rigorous system for translating from spec to code sure.

Hm, that's an interesting concept. What if we were able to create an unambiguous, rigorous specification language for creating prompts so that we could get consistent and predictable output from AI? Maybe we could call it a "prompt programming language" or something

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#192

Post by chaostheory »

whalesalad wrote: post #138
Rapzid wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use GitHub Copilot and unfortunately there has been a weird regression in the bundled Plan mode. It suddenly, when they added the new plan memory, started getting both VERY verbose in the plan output and also vague in the details. It's adding a lot of step that are like "design" and "figure out" and railroads you into implementation without asking follow-up questions.

I find that even with opus 4.6, copilot feels like it’s handicapped. I’m not sure if it’s related to memory or what but if I give two tasks to opus4.6 one in CC and one in Copilot, CC is substantially better. I’ve been really enjoying Codex CLI recently though. It seems to do just as well as Opus 4.6, but using the standard GPT 5.4

I have the same experience with Antigravity and Gemini CLI, both using Gemini 3 Pro. CLI works on the problem with more effort and time. Meanwhile, antigravity writes shitty python scripts for a few seconds and calls it a day. The agent harness matters a lot

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#193

Post by romanovcode »

coopykins wrote: post #171

There are so many of these "meta" frameworks going around. I have yet to see one that proves in any meaningful way they improve anything. I have a hard time believing they accomplish anything other than burn tokens and poison the context window with too much information. What works best IME is keeping things simple, clear and only providing the essential information for the task at hand, and iterating in manageable s…

It's basically .vimrc/.emacs.d of the current age.

These meta-frameworks are useful for the one who set them up but for another person they seem like complete garbage.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#194

Post by wg0 »

unstatusthequo wrote: post #133
yoaviram wrote: post #17

I've been using GSD extensively over the past 3 months. I previously used speckit, which I found lacking. GSD consistently gets me 95% of the way there on complex tasks. That's amazing. The last 5% is mostly "manual" testing. We've used GSD to build and launch a SaaS product including an agent-first CMS (whiteboar.it). It's hard to say why GSD worked so much better for us than other similar frameworks, because the un…

Same. Have had great results with it. I got sick of paying FreshBooks monthly for basic income/expense tracking for Schedule C reporting and used GSD to build a macOS Swift app with Codex 5.4 and Opus 4.6. It’s working great and I am considering releasing it on the App Store. It started as a web app, but then I wanted screen capture from other windows for receipts in email or whatever. Then I wanted physical receipts…

How much feature complete it is compared to Freshbooks?

Also, how much it is in terms of cost? Like - API costs?

Is it pure Swift? Or Electron app?

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#195

Post by recroad »

duskdozer wrote: post #188
sarchertech wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A ticketmaster competitor doesn’t sound like a huge technical challenge unless you’re operating at scale. So my first question would be why do you have a large codebase so with so few customers?

He's 5-7xing code output with the help of ~100% AI. More lines. More vibes. More velocity. Rocketship emoji.

Less vibes. In SDD you have to meticulously review your specs.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#197

Post by jghn »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #122
gtirloni wrote: post #21

I was using this and superpowers but eventually, Plan mode became enough and I prefer to steer Claude Code myself. These frameworks are great for fire-and-forget tasks, especially when there is some research involved but they burn 10x more tokens, in my experience. I was always hitting the Max plan limits for no discernable benefit in the outcomes I was getting. But this will vary a lot depending on how people prefer…

I ended up grafting the brainstorm, design, and implementation planning skills from Superpowers onto a Ralph-based implementation layer that doesn't ask for my input once the implementation plan is complete. I have to run it in a Docker sandbox because of the dangerously set permissions but that is probably a good idea anyway. It's working, and I'm enjoying how productive it is, but it feels like a step on a journey…

did you hand modify the superpowers skills or are you managing this some other way?

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#198

Post by LogicFailsMe »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #122
gtirloni wrote: post #21

I was using this and superpowers but eventually, Plan mode became enough and I prefer to steer Claude Code myself. These frameworks are great for fire-and-forget tasks, especially when there is some research involved but they burn 10x more tokens, in my experience. I was always hitting the Max plan limits for no discernable benefit in the outcomes I was getting. But this will vary a lot depending on how people prefer…

I ended up grafting the brainstorm, design, and implementation planning skills from Superpowers onto a Ralph-based implementation layer that doesn't ask for my input once the implementation plan is complete. I have to run it in a Docker sandbox because of the dangerously set permissions but that is probably a good idea anyway. It's working, and I'm enjoying how productive it is, but it feels like a step on a journey…

I find simple Ralph loops with an implementer and a reviewer that repeat until everything passes review and unit tests is 90% of the job.

I would love to do something more sophisticated but it's ironic that when I played both agents in this loop over the past few decades, the loop got faster and faster as computers got faster and faster. Now I'm back to waiting on agentic loops just like I used to wait for compilations on large code bases.

Re: Get Shit Done: A meta-prompting, context engineering and spec-driven dev system

#199

Post by dominotw »

indigodaddy wrote: post #48
prakashrj wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how I test my code currently. 1. Backend unit tests — fast in-memory tests that run the full suite in ~5 seconds on every save. 2. Full end-to-end tests — automated UI tests that spin up a real cloud server, run through the entire user journey (provision → connect → manage → teardown), and verify the app behaves correctly on all supported platforms (phone, tablet, desktop). 3. Screenshot regression tests — ev…

Check out exe.dev/Shelley web agent it facilitates much of what you describe by default.

yea i am not going to checkout your shitty vibecoded project.

Can we pls stop this.

Post reply on HN