Live data from Hacker News

What makes Claude Code so damn good

minusx.ai

21–30 of 322 posts

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#21

It shocks me when people say that LLMs don't make them more productive, because my experience has been the complete opposite, especially with Claude Code. Either I'm worse than then at programming, to the point that I find an LLM useful and they don't, or they don't know how to use LLMs for coding.

What do you work on, and what do LLMs do that helps?

(Not disagreeing, but most of these comments -- on both sides -- are pretty vague.)

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#22

It shocks me when people say that LLMs don't make them more productive, because my experience has been the complete opposite, especially with Claude Code. Either I'm worse than then at programming, to the point that I find an LLM useful and they don't, or they don't know how to use LLMs for coding.

What is performance like for you? I've been shocked at how many simple requests turn into >10 minutes of waiting.

If people are getting faster responses than this regularly, it could account for a large amount of the difference in experiences.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#23
post #5

What do people think of Google's Gemini (Pro?) compared to Claude for code? I really like a lot of what Google produces, but they can't seem to keep a product that they don't shut down and they can be pretty ham-fisted, both with corporate control (Chrome and corrupt practices) and censorship

For the web ui (chat)? I actually really like gemini 2.5 pro.

For the command line tool (claude code vs gemini code)? It isn't even close. Gemini code was useless. Claude code was mostly just slow.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#24

It shocks me when people say that LLMs don't make them more productive, because my experience has been the complete opposite, especially with Claude Code. Either I'm worse than then at programming, to the point that I find an LLM useful and they don't, or they don't know how to use LLMs for coding.

The best part about llm coding is that you feel productive even when you aren't, makes coding a lot more fun.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#25
I think it’s just that the base model is good at real world coding tasks - as opposed to the types of coding tasks in the common benchmarks.

If you use GitHub Copilot - which has its own system level prompts - you can hotswap between models, and Claude outperforms OpenAI’s and Google’s models by such a large margin that the others are functionally useless in comparison.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#26
post #22

It shocks me when people say that LLMs don't make them more productive, because my experience has been the complete opposite, especially with Claude Code. Either I'm worse than then at programming, to the point that I find an LLM useful and they don't, or they don't know how to use LLMs for coding.

What is performance like for you? I've been shocked at how many simple requests turn into >10 minutes of waiting. If people are getting faster responses than this regularly, it could account for a large amount of the difference in experiences.

Agree with this, though I've mostly been using Gemini CLI. Some of the simplest things, like applying a small diff, take many minutes as it loses track of the current file state and takes minutes to figure it out or fail entirely.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#27

It shocks me when people say that LLMs don't make them more productive, because my experience has been the complete opposite, especially with Claude Code. Either I'm worse than then at programming, to the point that I find an LLM useful and they don't, or they don't know how to use LLMs for coding.

It depends very much on your use case, language popularity, experience coding, and the size of your project. If you work on a large, legacy code base in COBOL, it's going to be much harder than working on a toy greenfield application in React. If your prior knowledge writing code is minimal, the more amazing the results will seem, and vice-versa.

Despite the persistent memes here and elsewhere, it doesn't depend very much on the particular tool you use (with the exception of model choice), how you hold it, or your experience prompting (beyond a bare minimum of competence). People who jump into any conversation with "use tool X" or "you just don't understand how to prompt" are the noise floor of any conversation about AI-assisted coding. Folks might as well be talking about Santeria.

Even for projects that I initiate with LLM support, I find that the usefulness of the tool declines quickly as the codebase increases in size. The iron law of the context window rules everything.

Edit: one thing I'll add, which I only recently realized exists (perhaps stupidly) is that there is a population of people who are willing to prompt expensive LLMs dozens of times to get a single working output. This approach seems to me to be roughly equivalent to pulling the lever on a slot machine, or blindly copy-pasting from Stack Overflow, and is not what I am talking about. I am talking about the tradeoffs involved in using LLMs as an assistant for human-guided programming.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#28

It shocks me when people say that LLMs don't make them more productive, because my experience has been the complete opposite, especially with Claude Code. Either I'm worse than then at programming, to the point that I find an LLM useful and they don't, or they don't know how to use LLMs for coding.

Agreed. I only started using Claude Code about a week and a half ago and I'm blown away by how productive I can be with it.

I've had occasions where a relatively short prompt solved me an entire day of debugging and fixing things, because it was tech stack I barely knew. Most impressive part was when CC knew the changes may take some time to be applied and just used `sleep 60; check logs;` 2-3 times and then started checking elsewhere if something's stuck. It was, CC cleaned it up and a minute later someone pinged me that the it works.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#29

I don’t know if I’m doing something wrong. I was using Sonnet 4 with GitHub Copilot. Recently a week ago switched to Claude Code. I find GitHub Copilot solves problem and bugs way better than Claude Code. For some reason, Claude Code seems very lazy. Has anyone experience something similar?

I haven’t tried other LLMs but have a fair amount of experience with Claude Code, and there definitely times when you have to be explicit about the route you want it to take and tell it to not take shortcuts.

It’s not consistent, though. I haven’t figured out what they are but it feels like there are circumstances where it’s more prone to doing ugly hacky things.

Re: What makes Claude Code so damn good

#30
post #5

What do people think of Google's Gemini (Pro?) compared to Claude for code? I really like a lot of what Google produces, but they can't seem to keep a product that they don't shut down and they can be pretty ham-fisted, both with corporate control (Chrome and corrupt practices) and censorship

In my experience it's better at lower level stuff, like systems programming. A pass afterwards with claude makes the code more readable.
Post reply on HN