Any word on patterns for security and deployment to prod?
Not yet, I'm still trying to figure out what the effective patterns for that are myself!
Agentic Engineering Patterns
101–110 of 341 posts
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
My experience is that the first iteration output from a single agent is not what I want to be on the hook for. What squares it for me with "not writing code anymore" is the iterative process to improve outputs: 1) Having review loops between agents (spawn separate "reviewer" agents) and clear tests / eval criteria improved results quite a bit for me. 2) Reviewing manually and giving instructions for improvements is n…
Is that… actually faster than just doing it yourself, tho? Like, “I could write the right thing, or I could have this robot write the wrong thing and then nag it til it corrects itself” seems to suggest a fairly obvious choice. I’ve yet to see these things do well on anything but trivial boilerplate.
In my experience, sometimes. Not that often, depends on the task.
The benefit is I can keep some things ticking over while I’m in meetings, to be honest.
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally today I think it’s 3. Eventually I do think it will be 2. I think you’ve got to make hay while the sun shines. Nobody knows how this is all going to play out, I just want to make sure I’m at the forefront of it.
So you think the tools will be intelligent yet somehow hard to master? And the progress is slowing down in such a way, that knowledge learned today will not be outdated anymore? Should investors be worried, since AGI is not coming anymore?
My advice is not to get hung up on whether this stuff is "intelligent" or caught out by the AGI hype.
We didn't ask if type-based autocomplete was "intelligent" before we started using that.
Treat coding agents as tools and figure out what they can and cannot do and how best to use them.
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#104I've experimented with agentic coding/engineering a lot recently. My observation is that software that is easily tested are perfect for this sort of agentic loop. In one of my experiments I had the simple goal of "making Linux binaries smaller to download using better compression" [1]. Compression is perfect for this. Easily validated (binary -> compress -> decompress -> binary) so each iteration should make a dent o…
"Test harness is everything, if you don't have a way of validating the work, the loop will go stray"
This is the most important piece to using AI coding agents. They are truly magical machines that can make easy work of a large number of development, general purpose computing, and data collection tasks, but without deterministic and executable checks and tests, you can't guarantee anything from one iteration of the loop to the next.
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not OP but every time I post a comment with this sentiment I get told “the latest models are what you need”. If every 3 months you are saying “it’s ready as long as you use the latest model”, then it wasn’t ready 3 months ago and it’s not likely to be ready now. To answer your question, I’ve tried both Claude code and Antigravity in the last 2 weeks and I’m still finding them struggling. AG with Gemini regularly…
Agree, it’s strange, I will just assume that the people who say this are building react apps. I still have so much ”certainly, I should not do this in a completely insane way, let me fix that” … -400+2. It’s not always, and it is better than it was, but that’s it.
I'm an ML engineer, so it's mostly been setting up data processing/training code in PyTorch, if that helps.
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#106Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think that’s true. Claude Opus 4.5/4.6 in Cursor have marked the big shift for me. Before that, agentic development mostly made me want to just do it myself, because it was getting stuck or going on tangents. I think it can (and is) shifting very rapidly. Everyone is different, and I’m sure models are better at different types of work (or styles of working), but it doesn’t take much to make it too frustrating…
> I don’t think that’s true. Claude Opus 4.5/4.6 in Cursor. Opus 4.6 has been out for less than a month. If it was a big shift surely we'd see a massive difference over 4.5 which was november. I think this proves the point, you're not seeing seisimic shifts every 3 months and you're not even clear about which model was the fix. > I think it can (and is) shifting very rapidly. Shifting, maybe. But shuffling deck chair…
I interpreted their comment to mean 4.5 was the shift, which was nov last year. "Before that" meaning pre 4.5.
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#108Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#109We're going to do it again, aren't we? We're going to take something simple and sensible ("write tests first", "small composable modules", etc.), give it a fancy complicated name ("Behavior-Constrained Implementation Lifecycle pattern", "Boundary-Scoped Processing Constructs pattern", etc.), and create an entire industry of consultants and experts selling books and enterprise coaching around it, each swearing they have the secret sauce and the right incantations.
The damn thing _talks_. You can just _speak_ to it. You can just ask it to do what you want.
Re: Agentic Engineering Patterns
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing I rarely see mentioned is that often creating code by hand is simply faster (at least for me) than using AI. Creating a plan for AI, waiting for execution, verifying, prompting again etc. can take more time than just doing it on my own with a plan in my head (and maybe some notes). Creating something from scratch or doing advanced refactoring is almost always faster with AI, but most of my daily tasks are b…
For me it _can_ be faster to code than to instruct but it takes me significantly less effort to write the prompt than the actual code. So a few hours of concentrates coding leave me completely drained of energy while after a few hours with the agents I still have a lot of mental energy. That's the huge difference for me and I don't want to go back.
Thats interesting. While i do get mentally tired after a session of focused coding, i feel like i have accomplished something. Using AI for coding feels similar to spending hours doom scrolling reels. Less engaging but Im drained as hell at the end.