Live data from Hacker News

Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

southbridge-research.notion.site

31–40 of 58 posts

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#31
If you want an example of a good analytical breakdown of some technology, look at this as an example: https://fabiensanglard.net/quake3/network.php

It is good because it highlights the relevant aspects of the design and you can use this, plus some other resources, to replicate the idea.

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#32
post #21
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you briefly explain your workflow? I use Zed’s agent mode and I don’t really understand how people are doing it purely through the CLI. How do you get a decent workflow where you can approve individual hunks? Aren’t you missing out on LSP help doing it in the CLI?

Claude code has a VS Code plugin now that lets you view and approve diffs in the editor. Before it did that, I really don't understand how people got anything of substance done because it simply isn't reliable enough over large codebases.

I managed this (and still do) just fine by using source control. Commits are checkpoints and it's trivial (esp. with AI-assisted CLI) to roll things back if needed. Workflow is all about small diffs, with sessions being fine-grained, not about implementing entire features wholesale. Serialize overall plans for feature work as files in the codebase in the interim.

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#33
post #23

The "LLMs perspective" section is hiding at the end of this notion is a literal goldmine

No, it's completely useless, and puts the entire rest of the analysis in a bad light. LLMs have next to no understanding of their own internal processes. There's a significant amount of research that demonstrates this. All explanations of an internal thought process in an LLM are completely reverse engineered to fit the final answer (interestingly, humans are also prone to this – seen especially in split brain experi…

It is completely reasonable and often - very - useful to evaluate and interpret instructions with LLMs.

You're stuck on the anthropomorphize semantics, but that wasn't the purpose of the exercise.

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#35

Claude Code with Sonnet 4 is so good I've stopped using Aider. This has been hugely productive. I've been able to write agents that Claude Code can spawn and call out to for other models, even.

What does it give you that enabling Sonnet as a backend for Aider doesn't?

An entirely different software and agent architecture - built by the creators of Claude themselves.

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#36
post #30

Claude Code with Sonnet 4 is so good I've stopped using Aider. This has been hugely productive. I've been able to write agents that Claude Code can spawn and call out to for other models, even.

If this is what software engineering is going to become I'm finding a new job.

Better start now! It’s incredible and unbelievable how productive it is. In my opinion it still takes someone with a staff level of engineering experience to guide it through the hard stuff, but it does in a day with just me what multiple product teams would take months to do, and better.

I’m building a non-trivial platform as a solo project/business and have been working on it since about January. I’ve gotten more done in two nights than I did in 3 months.

I’m sure there are tons of arguments and great points against what I just said, but it’s my current reality and I still can’t believe it. I shelled out the $100/mo after one night of blowing through the $20 credits I used as a trial.

It does struggle with design and front end. But don’t we all.

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#37
post #7

Claude Code with Sonnet 4 is so good I've stopped using Aider. This has been hugely productive. I've been able to write agents that Claude Code can spawn and call out to for other models, even.

Have you been able to interface Claude Code with Gemini 2.5 Pro? I'm finding that Gemini 2.5 Pro is still better at solving certain problems and architecture and it would be great to be able to consult directly in CC.

I do it indirectly. Gemini is my architecture goto. Claude Code for execution. It's just way more efficient to feed large portions of codebase at once to Gemini, pump out a plan and feed it to Claude Code. https://x.com/backnotprop/status/1929020702453100794

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#38

Claude Code with Sonnet 4 is so good I've stopped using Aider. This has been hugely productive. I've been able to write agents that Claude Code can spawn and call out to for other models, even.

What does it give you that enabling Sonnet as a backend for Aider doesn't?

Claude Code is "agentic". Aider isn't. It can plan, use external tools, run the compiler, tests, linters, etc. You can do some of it with Aider, too, but Claude is more independent. The downside is that it can get very expensive, very fast.

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#39

Claude Code with Sonnet 4 is so good I've stopped using Aider. This has been hugely productive. I've been able to write agents that Claude Code can spawn and call out to for other models, even.

What are some examples of agents you've created that you regularly use?

Re: Claude Code: An Agentic cleanroom analysis

#40
For large codebases and task management, you can empower Claude Code with a simple filesystem framework. https://x.com/backnotprop/status/1929020702453100794

It sees everything it needs to in one pass, no extra reasoning or instruction tokens around things like MCP that abstract and create hops to simple understanding of where things are at.

Post reply on HN