Earlier quoted context omitted.
bro wanna buy some monkey jpegs? 100% genuine
[flagged]
Are you sure that yours would sell for $80K, if you aren't using it to launder money with your criminal associates?
Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
221–230 of 351 posts
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#222I'd really like to see a regular poll on HN that keeps track of which AI coding agents are the most popular among this community, like the TIOBE Index for programming languages. Hard to keep up with all the changes and it would be nice to see a high level view of what people are using and how that might be shifting over time.
[deleted]
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#223I want it to generate better code but less of it, and be more proactive about getting human feedback before it starts going off the rails. This sounds like an inexorable push in the opposite direction. I can see this approach being useful once the foundation is more robust, has better common sense, knows when to push back when requirements conflict or are underspecified. But with current models I can only see this ap…
All you have to do is set up an MCP that routes to a human on the backend, and you d got an AI that asks for human feedback.
Antigravity and others already ask for human feedback on their plans.
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a professional setting where you still have coding standards, and people will review your code, and the code actually reaches hundreds of thousands of real users, handling one agent at a time is plenty for me. The code output is never good enough, and it makes up stuff even for moderately complicated debugging ("Oh I can clearly see the issue now", I heard it ten times before and you were always wrong!) I do use t…
This is my problem with the whole "can LLMs code?" discussion. Obviously, LLMs can produce code, well even, much like a champion golfer can get a hole in one. But can they code in the sense of "the pilot can fly the plane", i.e. barring a catastrophic mechanical malfunction or a once-in-a-decade weather phenomennon, the pilot will get the plane to its destination safely? I don't think so. To me, someone who can code…
That's a funny analogy. You should look into how modern planes are flown. Hint: it's a computer.
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#225Ok it might sound crazy but I actually got the best quality of code (completely ignoring that the cost is likely 10x more) by having a full “project team” using opencode with multiple sub agents which are all managed by a single Opus instance. I gave them the task to port a legacy Java server to C# .NET 10. 9 agents, 7-stage Kanban with isolated Git Worktrees. Manager (Claude Opus 4.5): Global event loop that wakes u…
This sounds like BMAD?
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#226Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is my problem with the whole "can LLMs code?" discussion. Obviously, LLMs can produce code, well even, much like a champion golfer can get a hole in one. But can they code in the sense of "the pilot can fly the plane", i.e. barring a catastrophic mechanical malfunction or a once-in-a-decade weather phenomennon, the pilot will get the plane to its destination safely? I don't think so. To me, someone who can code…
That's a funny analogy. You should look into how modern planes are flown. Hint: it's a computer.
> Hint: it's a computer.
Not quite, but in any event none of the avionics is an LLM or a program generated by one.
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s more about context management, not speed
Do you really need a full dev team ensemble to manage context? Surely subagents are enough.
Potato, potatoh. People get confused by all this agent talk and forget that, at the end of the day, LLM calls are effectively stateless. It's all abstractions around how to manage the context you send with each request.
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#229Ok it might sound crazy but I actually got the best quality of code (completely ignoring that the cost is likely 10x more) by having a full “project team” using opencode with multiple sub agents which are all managed by a single Opus instance. I gave them the task to port a legacy Java server to C# .NET 10. 9 agents, 7-stage Kanban with isolated Git Worktrees. Manager (Claude Opus 4.5): Global event loop that wakes u…
What are the costs looking like to run this? I wonder whether you would be able to use this approach within a mixture-of-experts model trained end-to-end in ensemble. That might take out some guesswork insofar the roles go.
Re: Claude Code's new hidden feature: Swarms
#230I've done plenty of vibe coding even though I know how to program but I mostly work with a single agent through its CLI. The progress is really good and more importantly, I can follow it. I can read the output, test it, and understand what changed and why. I don't see much upside in swarms. But I do see the downside which is losing the ability to keep the whole system in my head. The codebase starts growing in directions I didn't choose and it seems decisions will get made I didn't review. Early AI autocomplete that could finish a function already felt like a big productivity win and then AI that could write whole files was an even bigger jump. Like pretty massive. Running one agent at a time, watching what it does, and vetting the output still works well for me and still feels like a strong multiplier. But now there's so much more ceremony: AGENTS.md, SKILLS.md, delegation frameworks. I guess I'm not convinced that leads to better outcomes but I'm probably missing something. It just seems like a tradeoff that sacrifices understanding for ostensible progress.