I can't wait until Section 174 changes are repealed and nobody is financially invested in software from AI anymore.
Thank you, finally a realistic take.
It seems I'm in the vast minority. Post hoc ergo proper hoc indeed.
Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
211–220 of 253 posts
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#212Great article! I have similar observations and techniques and Claude Code is exceptionally good - most of the days I'm working on multiple things at once (thanks to git worktrees) and each going faster than ever - that's really crazy. For the "sub agents"thing, I must admit, that Claude Code calling o3 via sigoden/aichat saved me countless of times! There are just issues that o3 excells at (race conditions, bug hunti…
wait what? how do you work on multiple things at once with git worktrees?
I never had any reason to use it before claude code et al. So I also wasn’t aware
Commands for working with copies of your entire repo in a new folder on a new branch
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
wait what? how do you work on multiple things at once with git worktrees?
I never had any reason to use it before claude code et al. So I also wasn’t aware Commands for working with copies of your entire repo in a new folder on a new branch https://git-scm.com/docs/git-worktree
This is amazing, I had no idea about this, I have been cloning my repo locally for years.
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#214Great article! I have similar observations and techniques and Claude Code is exceptionally good - most of the days I'm working on multiple things at once (thanks to git worktrees) and each going faster than ever - that's really crazy. For the "sub agents"thing, I must admit, that Claude Code calling o3 via sigoden/aichat saved me countless of times! There are just issues that o3 excells at (race conditions, bug hunti…
wait what? how do you work on multiple things at once with git worktrees?
git worktree uses one repo to laid out multiple branches in separate directories.
git worktree add new/path/for/worktree branchname
I now refuse to use git checkout to switch branches, always keep my main branch checked out and updated and always use worktrees to work on features. Love this workflow!
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#215This article is a bit all over the place. First, a slide deck to describe a codebase is not that useful. There's a reason why no one ever uses a slide deck for anything besides supporting an oral presentation. Most of these things in the post aren't new capabilities. The automation of workflows is indeed valuable and cool. Not sure what AGI has anything to do with it.
The number one thing I have found LLMs useful for is producing mermaidjs diagrams of code. Now, I know they are not always perfect but it has been "good enough" very many times, and I have never seen hallucinations here, only omissions. If I notice something missing its super-easy to tell it to amend.
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#216Asking it to explain rust borrow checker is one of the worst examples to demonstrate its ability to read code. There are piles of that in its training data.
"There are piles of that in its training data"
Such a weird complaint. If you were to explain the rust borrow checker to me, should I complain that it doesn't count because you had read explanations of the borrow checker? That it was "in your training data"? I mean, do you think you just understand the borrow checker without being taught about it in some form?
I mean, I get what you are kind of saying, that there isn't much evidence that they tools are able to generate new ideas, and that the sheer amount of knowledge it has obscures the detection of that phenomenon, but practically speaking I don't care because it is useful and helpful (within its hallucinatory framework).
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#217Asking it to explain rust borrow checker is one of the worst examples to demonstrate its ability to read code. There are piles of that in its training data.
[deleted]
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most software engineers need to draw a class diagram from time to time. Maybe there are a lot of unnecessary details to the UML spec, but it certainly doesn't hurt to agree that a hollow triangle for the arrow head means parent/child while a normal arrow head means composition, with a diamond at the root for ownership. As the sibling comment says, sequence diagrams are often useful too. I've used them a few t…
True but I don't bother with a unified system, just a mermaid diagram. I work in web though, so perhaps if I went back to embedded (which I did only a short while) or something else when a project is planned in it entirety rather than growing organically/reacting to customers needs/trends/the whims of management.
I just looked at Mermaid and it seems to as close to UML as I meant by my previous comment. Just look at this class diagram [1]: triangle-ended arrows for parent/child, the classic UML class box of name/attributes/methods, stereotypes in >, etc. The text even mentions UML. I'm not a JS dev so tend to use PlantUML instead - which is also UML based, as the name implies.
I'm not sure what you mean by "unified system". If you mean some sort of giant data store of design/architecture where different diagrams are linked to each other, then I'm certainly NOT advocating that. "Archimate experience" is basically a red flag against both a person and the organisation they work for IMO.
(I once briefly contracted for a large company and bumped into a "software architect" in a kitchenette one day. What's your software development background, I asked him. He said: oh no, I can't code. D-: He spent all day fussing with diagrams that surely would be ignored by anyone doing the actual work.)
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
all of this just reads like the supposed UML zeitgeist that was supposed to transform java and eliminate development 20 years ago if this is all ultimately java but with even more steps, its a sign im definitely getting old. it’s just the same pattern of non technical people deceiving themselves into believing they dont need to be technical to build tech and then ultimately resulting in again 10-20 years of re-learni…
The mistake was going after programmers, instead of going after programming languages , where the actual problem is. UML may be ugly and in need of streamlining, but the idea of building software by creating and manipulating artifacts at the same conceptual level we are thinking at any given moment, is sound. Alas, we've long ago hit a wall in how much cross-cutting complexity we can stuff into the same piece of plai…
I’ve heard this many times before but I’ve never heard an argument that rebukes the plain fact that text is extremely expressive, and basically anything else we try to replace it with less so. And it happens that making a von Neumann machine do precisely what you want requires a high level of precision. Happy to understand otherwise!
Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
I felt the same thing about the onboarding. Like what future are we trying to build for ourselves here, exactly? The kind where instead of sitting down with a coworker to learn about a codebase, instead we get an ai generated PowerPoint to read alone???? Im so over this timeline.
Naw, the new future (technically the present for orgs that use AI intelligently) is: The AI already generated comprehensive README.md files and detailed module/function/variable (as needed) doc comments, which you could read but end up mostly being consumed by another AI, so you can just tell it what you're trying to do and ask it how you might accomplish that in the codebase, first at a conceptual level, then in cod…
What kind of stuff are you building where that is even remotely possible? I get that generating documentation works fine, but building features just isn't there yet for non-trivial apps, and don't even get me started on trying to get the agents to backtrack and change something they did