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

Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 434 posts

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#351

Post by ramraj07 »

vl wrote: post #318
ramraj07 wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience, which seems fairly isolated, is that using Gemini's web chat interface and pasting entire sections of my codebase beats any other agent I've seen. Some come close, and some are good with very large files etc, but if you have a decently organized codebase then using gemini like this beats anything else.

I work on established project with medium-size codebase, copying to chat and back is just not practical. This is why Claude Code rocks - it quite often finds relevant parts itself.

I use tools like 16x prompt to copy just the relevant files. Sure, the tools like Claude Code finds the relevant files, but what happens after they find files is still suboptimal to what I get if I paste them into gemini myself.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#352

Post by ramraj07 »

quantumHazer wrote: post #9

I'm going a little offtopic here, but I disagree with the OPs use of the term "PhD-level knowledge", although I have a huge amount of respect for antirez (beside that we are born in the same island). This phrasing can be misleading and points to a broader misunderstanding about the nature of doctoral studies, which it has been influenced by the marketing and hype discourse surrounding AI labs. The assertion that ther…

Except during the data science craze of 2015s, there was never a situation that you could just have a phd in any field and get any "phd level job", so whatever pedantic idea you have of what phds learn, not a single person who's hiring phds agrees with you. On the contrary, even most phd professors treat you as only a vessel of the very specific topic you studied during your phd. Go try to get a postdoc in a top lab when your PhD was not exactly what they work on already. I know I tried! Then gave up.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#354

Post by poulpy123 »

simonw wrote: post #141
dakiol wrote: post #25

> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4 Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third part…

The models I can run locally aren't as good yet, and are way more expensive to operate. Once it becomes economical to run a Claude 4 class model locally you'll see a lot more people doing that. The closest you can get right now might be Kimi K2 on a pair of 512GB Mac Studios, at a cost of about $20,000.

Yeah. I cannot even run significantly worse models on any machine I have at home.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#355

Post by IanCal »

dakiol wrote: post #37
azan_ wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paid models are just much, much better.

Of course they are. I wouldn't expect otherwise :) But the price we're paying (and I don't mean money) is very high, imho. We all talk about how good engineers write code that depends on high-level abstractions instead of low-level details, allowing us to replace third party dependencies easily and test our apps more effectively, keeping the core of our domain "pure". Well, isn't it time we started doing the same wit…

> Well, isn't it time we started doing the same with LLMs? I'm not talking about MCP, but rather an open source tool that can plug into either free and open source LLMs or private ones.

Almost all providers and models can be used with the OpenAI api and swapping between them is trivial.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#356

Post by PeterStuer »

dakiol wrote: post #25

> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4 Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third part…

I share uour concerns absolutely, and would run an open model local (or self hosted), but for now the reality is that what is available as such is not satisfactory compared to the closed frontier models only available through SaaS.

I hope this will change before (captured) regulation strangles open models.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#357

Post by wahnfrieden »

sneak wrote: post #271
dakiol wrote: post #25

> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4 Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third part…

Strong dependency? I can still code without LLMs, just an order of magnitude slower. There is no dependency at all.

The dependency arises from rising productivity expectations from employers and the market.

A cabbie is still dependent on the car if they can still drive a horse buggy and order of magnitude slower.

You are only not dependent if you are not doing this professionally and can enjoy the leisure of tending to your horses.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#359

Post by PeterStuer »

ozgung wrote: post #126
dakiol wrote: post #25

> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4 Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third part…

> The excuse "but you earn six figures, what' $200/month to you?" doesn't really capture the issue here. Just like every other subscription model, including the one in the Black Mirror episode, Common People. The value is too good to be true for the price at the beginning. But you become their prisoner in the long run, with increasing prices and degrading quality.

There is that chance. In other instances commoditization occurs before market consolidation.

As of now, specifically for coding assistance LLM, workflows remain generic enough to have relatively low switching costs between the different models.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#360

Post by shivasaxena »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #196
skydhash wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was a hardcore vim user 10 years ago, but now I just use PyCharm to work. I'm paid to solve problems, not to futz around with vim configs. The reason I don't like those arguments is that they merge two orthogonal stuff: Solving problems and optimizing your tooling. You can optimize PyCharm just as much you can fiddle with Vim's config. And people are solving with problems with Vim just as you do with an IDE. It's…

>The reason I don't like those arguments is that they merge two orthogonal stuff: Solving problems and optimizing your tooling. You can optimize PyCharm just as much you can fiddle with Vim's config. But you’re ignoring that the “optimizing tooling” is for the goal of making it easier for you. Its spending time now to decrease time spent in the long term. I spent over a decade with Emacs as my sole editor and have si…

If I may ask, why didn't you just use any available emacs config with python support? There are plenty on github, and ofc there's doom emacs, spacemacs, and probably others.

I can tell you in my case it was because I did want to play with emacs and get my hands dirty. But that does shift the blame to me since it's hardly fair to blame emacs for being so extensible and fun.

Post reply on HN