Great article and right on point.
Using AI to write better code more slowly
31–40 of 511 posts
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#32I've hit this point with AI where it's not a simple process, but a long drawn out back and forth. I'll use AI to design the implementation of a medium sized, cross cutting feature. Review all the details, maybe iterate on just that. Then implement with Claude 4.7 Max - which runs slower, but does a better job. Then review the implementation, then have Codex GPT 5.5 xhigh fast review it - which almost always finds cor…
And then Anthropic has an outage and you what...have a coffee break until then? All that time babysitting the AIs just to be a little faster but probably with less knowledge/control over what they did?
If you only have one AI window open, you’re doing it wrong. You task swap to another window/agent, get it working on something, rinse and repeat. I can keep 4 busy most of the time. When I task swap I also check in on what the other agents are doing to make sure they’re on track, not blocked and not struggling.
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#33I've hit this point with AI where it's not a simple process, but a long drawn out back and forth. I'll use AI to design the implementation of a medium sized, cross cutting feature. Review all the details, maybe iterate on just that. Then implement with Claude 4.7 Max - which runs slower, but does a better job. Then review the implementation, then have Codex GPT 5.5 xhigh fast review it - which almost always finds cor…
And then Anthropic has an outage and you what...have a coffee break until then? All that time babysitting the AIs just to be a little faster but probably with less knowledge/control over what they did?
Codex has 99.98% uptime
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#34I've hit this point with AI where it's not a simple process, but a long drawn out back and forth. I'll use AI to design the implementation of a medium sized, cross cutting feature. Review all the details, maybe iterate on just that. Then implement with Claude 4.7 Max - which runs slower, but does a better job. Then review the implementation, then have Codex GPT 5.5 xhigh fast review it - which almost always finds cor…
And then Anthropic has an outage and you what...have a coffee break until then? All that time babysitting the AIs just to be a little faster but probably with less knowledge/control over what they did?
We're already having coffee breaks when AWS and CloudFlare are down. What's another break in the mix? If anything, we might be lucky that they're down at the same time, so we can consolidate the breaks.
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#35https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48246232
This reminds me the article above. Now people have diverse ideas on agentic coding. Some suggest human-in-the-loop while others suggest giving a detailed specification and let the agent run freely; some suggest leveraging LLM's high productivity and here we get an opinion that LLM can actually slowly write good code.
It's happy to see opinions that are more practical and variant emerging, turning LLM into literally a tool instead of something to be hated or hyped.
In my own practice, I find LLMs (SOTA ones) good at medium-level tasks, those needed to reason and plan for a while. However, the design taste on architecture is unexpectedly disgusting. Sometimes writing interfaces myself and asking LLMs to fill in implementations, alongside context-completing tools like context7, deepwiki, docs.rs MCPs, etc. and giving a escape hatch (e.g. encouraging it to use the AskUser tool in Claude Code), may be considered my best practice.
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#36I've hit this point with AI where it's not a simple process, but a long drawn out back and forth. I'll use AI to design the implementation of a medium sized, cross cutting feature. Review all the details, maybe iterate on just that. Then implement with Claude 4.7 Max - which runs slower, but does a better job. Then review the implementation, then have Codex GPT 5.5 xhigh fast review it - which almost always finds cor…
You helpfully cite Claude w/ Opus 4.7 max and Codex w/ GPT5.5 xhigh fast, but what "AI" do you use for the initial design?
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe we can come up with an spec for aligning asci diagrams. Can't really build anything with confidence when the attention to detail is lacking in these agentic systems https://imgur.com/a/r4fhOwy
What's that from? OpenSpec docs?
Yeah not trying to pick on any particular project because its quite the mark that the writer didn't proof read the documentation and its quite widespread
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#38I find myself spending on average more time in LLM review/resolution loops than it would take for me to write the code by hand. Partially because once I'm in the flow I write very very quickly and the code pours out sometimes faster than I can write. But also because the LLM code on the first few tries is generally really really bad. What I find interesting though is that spending the time to personally review and di…
If your AI is writing bad code then you need to change your AI. No current high-end AI should be producing bad code.
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#39I've hit this point with AI where it's not a simple process, but a long drawn out back and forth. I'll use AI to design the implementation of a medium sized, cross cutting feature. Review all the details, maybe iterate on just that. Then implement with Claude 4.7 Max - which runs slower, but does a better job. Then review the implementation, then have Codex GPT 5.5 xhigh fast review it - which almost always finds cor…
And then Anthropic has an outage and you what...have a coffee break until then? All that time babysitting the AIs just to be a little faster but probably with less knowledge/control over what they did?
In Soviet Russia, the AI babysits you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Soviet_Russia
Re: Using AI to write better code more slowly
#40I've hit this point with AI where it's not a simple process, but a long drawn out back and forth. I'll use AI to design the implementation of a medium sized, cross cutting feature. Review all the details, maybe iterate on just that. Then implement with Claude 4.7 Max - which runs slower, but does a better job. Then review the implementation, then have Codex GPT 5.5 xhigh fast review it - which almost always finds cor…
You helpfully cite Claude w/ Opus 4.7 max and Codex w/ GPT5.5 xhigh fast, but what "AI" do you use for the initial design?
Claude primarily, though will sometimes get a second opinion from Codex.