111–120 of 168 posts
Am I the only one that doesn’t see the hype with Claude? I recently tried it, hit the usage limit, read around found tons of blogs and posts from devs saying Claude is the best code assistant LLM… so I purchased Claude pro… and I hate it. I have been asking it surface level questions about Apache spark (configuring the number of tasks retries, errors, error handling, etc.) and it hallucinated so much, so frequently.…
Am I the only one that doesn’t see the hype with Claude? I recently tried it, hit the usage limit, read around found tons of blogs and posts from devs saying Claude is the best code assistant LLM… so I purchased Claude pro… and I hate it. I have been asking it surface level questions about Apache spark (configuring the number of tasks retries, errors, error handling, etc.) and it hallucinated so much, so frequently.…
It seems like you might be trying to use it like a search engine, which is a common mistake people make when first trying LLMs. LLMs are not like Google. The key is to give it context so it can help you. For example, if you want it to help you with Spark configuration, give it the Spark docs. If you want it to help you write code, give it your codebase. Tools like cursor and the like make this process very easy. You…
Thanks again!
Am I the only one that doesn’t see the hype with Claude? I recently tried it, hit the usage limit, read around found tons of blogs and posts from devs saying Claude is the best code assistant LLM… so I purchased Claude pro… and I hate it. I have been asking it surface level questions about Apache spark (configuring the number of tasks retries, errors, error handling, etc.) and it hallucinated so much, so frequently.…
Claude is exceptionally good at taking "here is two paragraphs of me rambling off about a feature I want in broken voice to text" and actually understanding what you want. It has really good prompt adherence but at the same time knows when to read between the lines.
I act as the director, creativity and ideas person. I have one LLM that implements, and a second LLM that critiques and suggests improvements and alternatives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The end of artisan frameworks - probably for the better.
It's likely the end of a lot of abstractions that made programming easier. At some point, specialized code-gen transformer models should get really good at just spitting out the lowest level code required to perform the job.
Absolutely LLMs are great for greenfield projects. They can get you to a prototype for a new idea faster than any tool yet invented. Where they start to break down, I find, is when you ask it to make changes/refactors to existing code and mature projects. They usually lack context, so they doesn't hesitate to introduce lots of extra complexity, add frameworks you don't need, and in general just make the situation wor…
The greenfield projects turn into a mess very quick because if you let it code without any guidance (wrt documentation, interactivity, testability, modularity) it generates crap until you can't modify it. The greenfield project turns into legacy as fast as the agent can spit out new code.
That lonely/downtime section at the end is a giant red flag for me. It looks like the sort of nonproductive yak-shaving you do when you're stuck or avoiding an unpleasant task--coasting, fooling around incrementally with your LLM because your project's fucked and you psychologically need some sense of progress. The opposite of this is burnout--one of the things they don't tell you about successful projects with good…
Something I’ve started to do recently is mob programming with LLM’s. I act as the director, creativity and ideas person. I have one LLM that implements, and a second LLM that critiques and suggests improvements and alternatives.