The highest quality codebase
101–110 of 409 posts
Re: The highest quality codebase
#102Re: The highest quality codebase
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why you treat it like a junior dev. You do the fun stuff of supervising the product, overseeing design and implementation, breaking up the work, and reviewing the outputs. It does the boring stuff of actually writing the code. I am phenomenally productive this way, I am happier at my job, and its quality of work is extremely high as long as I occasionally have it stop and self-review it's progress against the…
Cool cool cool. So if you use LLMs as junior devs, let me ask you how future awesome senior devs like you will come around? From WHAT job experience? From what coding struggle?
I'm asking because I legitimately have not figured out an answer to this problem.
Re: The highest quality codebase
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my case, I enjoy writing code too, but it's helpful to have an assistant I can ask to handle small tasks so I can focus on a specific part that requires attention to detail
Yeah, I sometimes use AI for questions like "is it possible to do [x] using library [y] and if so, how?" and have received mostly solid answers.
You may get possibilities, but not for what you asked for.
Re: The highest quality codebase
#105The point he’s making - that LLM’s aren’t ready for broadly unsupervised software development - is well made. It still requires an exhausting amount of thought and energy to make the LLM go in the direction I want, which is to say in a direction which considers the code which is outside the current context window. I suspect that we will not solve the context window problem for a long time. But we will see a tremendou…
I think LLMs are still at the 'advanced autocomplete' stage, where the most productive way to use them is to have a human in the loop.
In this, accuracy of following instructions, and short feedback time is much more important than semi-decent behavior over long-horizon tasks.
Re: The highest quality codebase
#1061) Run multiple code analysis tools over it and have the LLM aggregate it with suggestions
2) ask the LLM to list potential improvements open ended question and pick by hand which I want
And usually repeat the process with a completely different model (ie diff company trained it)
Any more and yeah they end up going in circles
Re: The highest quality codebase
#107Yeah. I noticed Claud suffers when it reaches context overload - its too opinionated, so it shortens its own context with decisions I would not ever make, yet I see it telling itself that the shortcuts are a good idea because the project is complex...then it gets into a loop where it second guesses its own decisions and forgets the context and then continues to spiral uncontrollably into deeper and deeper failures -…
> Yeah. I noticed Claud suffers when it reaches context overload All LLMs degrade in quality as soon as you go beyond one user message and one assistant response. If you're looking for accuracy and highest possible quality, you need to constantly redo the conversations from scratch, never go beyond one user message. If the LLM gets it wrong in their first response, instead of saying "No, what I meant was...", you nee…
Re: The highest quality codebase
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why you treat it like a junior dev. You do the fun stuff of supervising the product, overseeing design and implementation, breaking up the work, and reviewing the outputs. It does the boring stuff of actually writing the code. I am phenomenally productive this way, I am happier at my job, and its quality of work is extremely high as long as I occasionally have it stop and self-review it's progress against the…
Cool cool cool. So if you use LLMs as junior devs, let me ask you how future awesome senior devs like you will come around? From WHAT job experience? From what coding struggle?
Re: The highest quality codebase
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why you treat it like a junior dev. You do the fun stuff of supervising the product, overseeing design and implementation, breaking up the work, and reviewing the outputs. It does the boring stuff of actually writing the code. I am phenomenally productive this way, I am happier at my job, and its quality of work is extremely high as long as I occasionally have it stop and self-review it's progress against the…
Maybe I'm weird but I enjoy "actually writing the code."
On the other hand, if e.g. I need a web interface to do something, the only way I can enjoy myself is by designing my own web framework, which is pretty time-consuming, and then I still need to figure out how to make collapsible sections in CSS and blerghhh. Claude can do that in a few seconds. It's a delightful moment of "oh, thank god, I don't have to do this crap anymore."
There are many coding tasks that are just tedium, including 99% of frontend development and over half of backend development. I think it's fine to throw that stuff to AI. It still leaves a lot of fun on the table.
Re: The highest quality codebase
#110`--dangerously-skip-permissions` why?