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

Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

blog.alaindichiappari.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 611 posts

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#101

Post by apapkka »

> But the true revolution happened clearly last year

Oh, that seems like a good bit of time!

> and since December 2025

So like..1 or 2 months ago? This is like saying “over half of people who tried our product loved it - all 51% of them!”. This article is pushing hype, and is mistaking Anthropics pre IPO marketing drive as actual change.

> What’s gone is the tearing, exhausting manual labour of typing every single line of code.

I constantly see this and think I must be operating in a different world. This never took significant amounts of time. Are people using react to make text blogs or something?

When you choose the right framework it saves you enormous amounts of time. Sounds like the author has trouble separating hype from fact. Pick the right framework and your LLM will work better, too.

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#102

Post by thwarted »

wtetzner wrote: post #34
abcde666777 wrote: post #25

It's strange to me when articles like this describe the 'pain of writing code'. I've always found that the easy part. Anyway, this stuff makes me think of what it would be like if you had Tolkein around today using AI to assist him in his writing. 'Claude, generate me a paragraph describing Frodo and Sam having an argument over the trustworthiness of Gollum. Frodo should be defending Gollum and Sam should be on his s…

> It's strange to me when articles like this describe the 'pain of writing code'. I find it strange to compare the comment sections for AI articles with those about vim/emacs etc. In the vim/emacs comments, people always state that typing in code hardly takes any time, and thinking hard is where they spend their time, so it's not worth learning to type fast. Then in the AI comments, they say that with AI writing the…

At first I thought you were referring to the debates over using vim or using emacs, but I think you mean to refer to the discussions about learning to use/switching to powerful editors like vim or emacs. If you learn and use a sharp, powerful editor and learn to type fast, the "burden" of editing and typing goes away.

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#103

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

I would think that frameworks make more sense than ever with LLMs.

The benefits of frameworks were always having something well tested that you knew would do the job, and that after a bit of use you'd be familiar with, and the same still stands.

LLMs still aren't AGI, and they learn by example. The reason they are decent at writing React code is because they were trained on a lot of it, and they are going to be better at generating based on what they were trained on, than reinventing the wheel.

As the human-in-the-loop, having the LLM generate code for a framework you are familiar with (or at least other people are familiar with) also let's you step in and fix bugs if necessary.

If we get to a point, post-AGI, where we accept AGI writing fully custom code for everything (but why would it - if it has human-level intelligence, wouldn't it see the value in learning and using well-debugged and optimized frameworks?!), then we will have mostly lost control of the process.

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#104

Post by dathinab »

> The three problems frameworks solve (or claim to) [..] Simplification [..] Automation [..] Labour cost

and he misses _the most important problem frameworks solve_

which is correctness

when it comes to programming most things are far more complicated in subtle annoying ways then they seem to be

and worse while you often can "cut away" on this corner cases this also tends to lead to obscure very hard to find bugs including security issues which have a tendency to pop up way later when you haven't touched to code for a while and don't remember which corner you cut (and with AI you like did never know which corner you did cut)

like just very recently some very widely used python libraries had some pretty bad bugs wrt. "basic" HTTP/web topics like http/multipart request smuggling, DOS from "decompression bombs" and similar

and while this might look like it's a counter argument, it speaks for strict code reuse even for simple topics. Because now this bugs have been fixed! And that is a very common topic for frameworks/libraries, they start out with bugs, and sadly often the same repeated common bugs known from other frameworks, and then over time things get ironed out.

But with AI there is an issue, a lot of the data it's trained on is code _which does many of this "typical" issues wrong_.

And it's non-determenistic, and good at "hiding" bugs, especially the kind of bugs which anyway are prone to pass human reviews.

So you _really_ would want to maximize use of frameworks and libraries when using AI, as that large part of the AI reliability issues.

But what does change is that there is much less reason to give frameworks/libraries "neat compact APIs" (which is a common things people spend A LOT of time one and which is prone to be the source of issues as people insist on making things "look simpler" then they are and in turn accidentally make them not just simpler but outright wrong, or prevent use-cases you might need).

Now depending on you definition of framework you could argue that AI removes boiler-parts issues in ways which allow effectively replacing all frameworks with libraries.

But you still need to review code, especially AI generated code. To some degree the old saying that code is far more read then written is even more true with AI (as most isn't "written"(by human) anymore). Now you could just not review AI code, but that can easily count as gross negligence and in some jurisdictions it's not (fully) possible to opt out of damages from gross negligence no matter what you put in TOS or other contracts. I.e. I can't recommend such negligent actions.

So IMHO there is still use for some kind of frameworks, even if what you want from them will likely start to differ and many of them can be partially or fully "librarified".

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#105

Post by irishcoffee »

mycall wrote: post #64
abcde666777 wrote: post #25

It's strange to me when articles like this describe the 'pain of writing code'. I've always found that the easy part. Anyway, this stuff makes me think of what it would be like if you had Tolkein around today using AI to assist him in his writing. 'Claude, generate me a paragraph describing Frodo and Sam having an argument over the trustworthiness of Gollum. Frodo should be defending Gollum and Sam should be on his s…

Isn't that what Tolkien did in his head? Write something, learn what he liked/didn't like then revise the words? Rinse/repeat. Same process here.

If Tolkien had not lived an entire life, fought in a war, been buddies with other authors, and also been a decent writer, the story doesn’t exist. And an LLM won’t come up with it.

An LLM isn’t coming up with the eye of Sauron, or the entire backstory of the ring, or gollum, etc etc

The LLM can’t know Tolkien had a whole universe built in his head that he worked for decades to get on to paper.

I’m so tired of this whole “an LLM just does what humans already do!” And then conflating that with “fuck all this LLM slop!”

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#107

Post by ctoth »

hakunin wrote: post #78
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if I had written it completely by myself from the start, I would have finished the project in the same amount of time but I’d understand the details far better. I believe the argument from the other camp is that you don't need to understand the code anymore, just like you don't need to understand the assembly language.

Of all the points the "other side" makes, this one seems the most incoherent. Code is deterministic, AI isn’t. We don’t have to look at assembly, because a compiler produces the same result every time. If you only understand the code by talking to AI, you would’ve been able to ask AI “how do we do a business feature” and ai would spit out a detailed answer, for a codebase that just says “pretend there is a codebase h…

> other side???

> We don’t have to look at assembly, because a compiler produces the same result every time.

This is technically true in the narrowest possible sense and practically misleading in almost every way that matters. Anyone who's had a bug that only manifests at -O2, or fought undefined behavior in C that two compilers handle differently, or watched MSVC and GCC produce meaningfully different codegen from identical source, or hit a Heisenbug that disappears when you add a printf ... the "deterministic compiler" is doing a LOT of work in that sentence that actual compilers don't deliver on.

Also what's with the "sides" and "camps?" ... why would you not keep your identity small here? Why define yourself as a {pro, anti} AI person so early? So weird!

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#108

Post by nradov »

echelon wrote: post #54
creata wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want to be able to make art and music and movies and games. Then make them. What's stopping you?

I want to live forever and set foot on distant planets in other galaxies. Got a prescription for that too? I've made films for fifteen years. I hate the process. Every one of my friends and colleagues that went to film school found out quickly that their dreams would wither and die on the vine due to the pyramid nature of studio capital allocation and expenditure. Not a lot of high autonomy in that world. Much of it…

Computing technology always becomes cheaper and more powerful over time. But it's a slow process. The rate of improvement for LLMs is already decreasing. You will die of old age before the technology that you seem to be looking for arrives.

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#109

Post by bvan »

Intellectual surrender is exactly the risk I fear with coding agents. Will the next generation of software ‘developers’ still know how to code? Seems coding agents are in a way taking us further from understanding the machine, just like frameworks have in the past.

Re: Coding agents have replaced every framework I used

#110

Post by toddmorey »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #103

I would think that frameworks make more sense than ever with LLMs. The benefits of frameworks were always having something well tested that you knew would do the job, and that after a bit of use you'd be familiar with, and the same still stands. LLMs still aren't AGI, and they learn by example. The reason they are decent at writing React code is because they were trained on a lot of it, and they are going to be bette…

It’s fun to ask the models their input. I was working on diagrams and was sure Claude would want some python / js framework to handle layout and nodes and connections. It said “honestly I find it easiest to just write the svg code directly”.
Post reply on HN