Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How I write software with LLMs

stavros.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 544 posts

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#241

Post by vova_hn2 »

datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #236
awakeasleep wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain how fragility of implementation, like spaghetti code, high coupling low cohesion fit into your world view?

Also developer UX, common antipatterns, etc This “the only thing that matters about code is whether it meets requirements” is such a tired take and I can’t imagine anyone seriously spouting it has has had to maintain real software.

I personally haven't made my my mind either way yet, but I imagine that a vibecoding advocate could say to you that maintaining code makes sense only when the code is expensive to produce.

If the code is cheap to produce, you don't maintain it, you just throw it away and regenerate.

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#242

Post by petcat »

zackify wrote: post #239
miguelgrinberg wrote: post #151

> One thing I’ve noticed is that different people get wildly different results with LLMs, so I suspect there’s some element of how you’re talking to them that affects the results. It's always easier to blame the prompt and convince yourself that you have some sort of talent in how you talk to LLMs that other's don't. In my experience the differences are mostly in how the code produced by the LLM is reviewed. Develope…

This definitely is the case. I was talking to someone complaining about how llms don't work good. They said it couldn't fix an issue it made. I asked if they gave it any way to validate what it did. They did not, some people really are saying "fix this" instead of saying "x fn is doing y when someone makes a request to it. Please attempt to fix x and validate it by accessing the endpoint after and writing tests" Its…

If you tell a human junior developer just "fix this" then they will spend a week on a wild-goose chase with nothing to show for it.

At least the LLM will only take 5 minutes to tell you they don't know what to do.

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#243

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

awakeasleep wrote: post #230
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have 30 years of experience delivering code and 10 years of leading architecture. My argument is the only thing that matters is does the entire implementation - code + architecture (your database, networking, your runtime that determines scaling, etc) meet the functional and none functional requirements. Functional = does it meet the business requirements and UX and non functional = scalability, security, performan…

Explain how fragility of implementation, like spaghetti code, high coupling low cohesion fit into your world view?

You did see the part about my unit, integration and scalability testing? The testing harness is what prevents the fragility.

It doesn’t matter to AI whether the code is spaghetti code or not. What you said was only important when humans were maintaining the code.

No human should ever be forced to look at the code behind my vibe coded internal admin portal that was created with straight Python, no frameworks, server side rendered and produced HTML and JS for the front end all hosted in a single Lambda including much of the backend API.

I haven’t done web development since 2002 with Classic ASP besides some copy and paste feature work once in a blue moon.

In my repos - post AI. My Claude/Agent files have summaries of the initial statement of work, the transcripts from the requirement sessions, my well labeled design diagrams , my design review sessions transcripts where I explained it to client and answered questions and a link to the Google NotebookLM project with all of the artifacts. I have separate md files for different implemtation components.

The NotebookLM project can be used for any future maintainers to ask questions about the project based on all of the artifacts.

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#244

Post by sarchertech »

petcat wrote: post #237
awakeasleep wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain how fragility of implementation, like spaghetti code, high coupling low cohesion fit into your world view?

As human developers, I think we're struggling with "letting go" of the code. The code we write (or agents write) is really just an intermediate representation (IR) of the solution. For instance, GCC will inline functions, unroll loops, and myriad other optimizations that we don't care about (and actually want!). But when we review the ASM that GCC generates we are not concerned with the "spaghetti" and the "high coup…

A compiler uses rigorous modeling and testing to ensure that generated code is semantically equivalent. It can do this because it is translating from one formal language to another.

Translating a natural prompt on the other hand requires the LLM to make thousands of small decisions that will be different each time you regenerate the artifact. Even ignoring non-determinism, prompt instability means that any small change to the spec will result in a vastly different program.

A natural language spec and test suite cannot be complete enough to encode all of these differences without being at least as complex as the code.

Therefore each time you regenerate large sections of code without review, you will see scores of observable behavior differences that will surface to the user as churn, jank, and broken workflows.

Your tests will not encode every user workflow, not even close. Ask yourself if you have ever worked on a non trivial piece of software where you could randomly regenerate 10% of the implementation while keeping to the spec without seeing a flurry of bug reports.

This may change if LLMs improve such that they are able to reason about code changes to the degree a human can. As of today they cannot do this and require tests and human code review to prevent them from spinning out. But I suspect at that point they’ll be doing our job, as well as the CEOs and we’ll have bigger problems.

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#245

Post by FiberBundle »

danbruc wrote: post #139

I randomly clicked and scrolled through the source code of Stavrobot - The largest thing I’ve built lately is an alternative to OpenClaw that focuses on security. [1] and that is not great code. I have not used any AI to write code yet but considered trying it out - is this the kind of code I should expect? Or maybe the other way around, has someone an example of some non-trivial code - in size and complexity - writt…

Pine Town [1], the "whimsical infinite multiplayer canvas of a meadow", also looks like pure slop.

[1] https://pine.town/

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#246

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #236
awakeasleep wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain how fragility of implementation, like spaghetti code, high coupling low cohesion fit into your world view?

Also developer UX, common antipatterns, etc This “the only thing that matters about code is whether it meets requirements” is such a tired take and I can’t imagine anyone seriously spouting it has has had to maintain real software.

The developer UX are the markdown files if no developer ever looks at the code.

Whether you are tired of it or not, absolutely no one in your value you chain - your customers who give your company money or your management chain cares about your code beyond does it meet the functional and non functional requirements - they never did.

And of course whether it was done on time and on budget

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#247

Post by cpt_sobel »

dmos62 wrote: post #149
cpt_sobel wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wondering was never about being abusive, rather just having a dry tone and cutting the unnecessary parts, some sort of middle ground if you will. Prompting "yo chatgeepeetee whats good lemme get this feature real quick" doesn't make sense to me mostly because it's anthrophomorphizing it, and it's the same concept of unnecessary writing as "Good morning ChatGPT, would you please help me with ..."

I guess in part I commented not on what you said, but on seeing people be abusive when an LLM doesn't follow instructions or fails to fulfill some expectation. I think I had some pent up feelings about that. > having a dry tone and cutting the unnecessary parts That's how I try to communicate in professional settings (AI included). Our approaches might not be that different.

> seeing people be abusive when an LLM doesn't follow instructions or fails to fulfill some expectation. I think I had some pent up feelings about that.

Oh me too, because people are anthropomorphizing the LLM, not because they hurt it. Indirectly, though, I agree that this behaviour can easily affect the way this person would speak to other humans

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#248

Post by xhale »

stavros wrote: post #210
xhale wrote: post #23

Hi, anyone has a simple example/scaffold how to set up agents/skills like this? I’ve looked at the stavrobots repo and only saw an AGENTS.md. Where do these skills live then? (I have seen obra/superpowers mentioned in the comments, but that’s already too complex and with an ui focus)

These skills live in my home directory, that's why they aren't in the repos. I can upload them if you want.

[dead]

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#249

Post by [deleted] »

petcat wrote: post #242
zackify wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This definitely is the case. I was talking to someone complaining about how llms don't work good. They said it couldn't fix an issue it made. I asked if they gave it any way to validate what it did. They did not, some people really are saying "fix this" instead of saying "x fn is doing y when someone makes a request to it. Please attempt to fix x and validate it by accessing the endpoint after and writing tests" Its…

If you tell a human junior developer just "fix this" then they will spend a week on a wild-goose chase with nothing to show for it. At least the LLM will only take 5 minutes to tell you they don't know what to do.

[deleted]

Re: How I write software with LLMs

#250

Post by mkovach »

What hurts the most is that the em dash used to be a small, rebellious literary act that I truly enjoyed employing. A simple, useful hinge in a sentence where it could change its mind. Now? It indicates when an LLM got too frisky with clause boundaries and maintains a phobia of semicolons.
Post reply on HN