Superpowers: How I'm using coding agents in October 2025

Post by _se » Sat, Oct 11, 2025, 7:17 PM UTC

paweladamczuk wrote: post #99

gdulli wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also possible to put in enough hours of real coding to get to the point where coding really isn't that hard anymore, at least not hard enough to justify switching from those stable/solid fundamental skills to a constantly revolving ecosystem of ephemeral tools, models, model versions, best practices, lessons from trial and error, etc. Then you could bypass all of this distraction. Admittedly that stance is easie…

"There exist developers whose performance cannot be boosted by an LLM" is a really strong statement.

Post by simonw » Sat, Oct 11, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #54

mwigdahl wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that you're talking about a multistep process where each step beyond the first depends on the particular path the agent starts down, along with human input that's going to vary at each step. I made a crude first stab at an approach that at least uses similar steps and structure to compare the effectiveness of AI agents. My approach was used on a small toy problem, but one that was complex enough the ag…

What you're getting at is the heart of the problem with the LLM hype train though, isn't it? "We should have rigorous evaluations of whether or not [thing] works." seems like an incredibly obvious thought. But in the realm of LLM-enabled use cases they're also expensive . You'd need to recruit dozens, perhaps even hundreds of developers to do this, with extensive observation and rating of the results. So rather than…

Post by Retric » Sat, Oct 11, 2025, 7:31 PM UTC

rkomorn wrote: post #103

Retric wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who hurt you? Sorry couldn’t resist. Agile’s point was getting feedback during the process rather than after something is complete enough to be shipped thus minimizing risk and avoiding wasted effort. Instead people are splitting up major projects into tiny shippable features and calling that agile while missing the point.

I've never seen a working scrum/agile/sprint/whatever product/project management system and I'm convinced it's because I've just never seen an actual implementation of one. "Splitting up major projects into tiny shippable features and calling that agile" feels like a much more accurate description of what I've experienced. I wish I'd gotten to see the real thing(s) so I could at least have an informed opinion.

Post by jvanderbot » Sat, Oct 11, 2025, 7:32 PM UTC

d_sem wrote: post #72

This article left me wishing it was "How I'm using coding agents to do task better" I've been exploring AI for two years now. It's certainly upgraded itself from the toy classification to a basic utility. However, I increasingly run into its limitations and find reverting to pre-LLM ways of working more robust, faster, and more mentally sustainable. Does someone have concrete examples of integrating LLM in a workflow…

Post by simonw » Sat, Oct 11, 2025, 7:34 PM UTC

d_sem wrote: post #72

This article left me wishing it was "How I'm using coding agents to do task better" I've been exploring AI for two years now. It's certainly upgraded itself from the toy classification to a basic utility. However, I increasingly run into its limitations and find reverting to pre-LLM ways of working more robust, faster, and more mentally sustainable. Does someone have concrete examples of integrating LLM in a workflow…