41–50 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give an example? Looks fairly decent to me
1. Randomly peeking at process.argv and process.env all around. Other weird layering violations, too. 2. Tons of repeat code, eg. multiple ad-hoc implementations of hash functions / PRNGs. 3. Almost no high-level comments about structure - I assume all that lives in some CLAUDE.md instead.
Codex and gemini cli are open source already. And plenty of other agents. I don't think there is any moat in claude code source.
I wonder what will happen with the poor guy who forgot to delete the code...
Why weren't proper checks in place in the first place?
Bonus: why didn't they setup their own AI-assisted tools to harness the release checks?
Original llama models leaked from meta. Instead of fighting it they decided to publish them officially. Real boost to the OS/OW models movement, they have been leading it for a while after that.
It would be interesting to see that same thing with CC, but I doubt it'll ever happen.
I guess it's time for Anthropic to open source Claude Code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Randomly peeking at process.argv and process.env all around. Other weird layering violations, too. 2. Tons of repeat code, eg. multiple ad-hoc implementations of hash functions / PRNGs. 3. Almost no high-level comments about structure - I assume all that lives in some CLAUDE.md instead.
What is wrong with peeking at process.env? It is a global map, after all. I assume, of course, that they don't mutate it.
The code looks, at a glance, as bad as you expect.