[dead]
Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
371–380 of 657 posts
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#372Haven't seen this mentioned yet, but the worst part for me is that a lot of management LOVES to use Claude to generate 50 page design documents, PRDs, etc., and send them to us to "please review as soon as you can". Nobody reads it, not even the people making it. I'm watching some employees just generate endless slide decks of nonsense and then waffle when asked any specific questions. If any of that is read, it is b…
I noticied what previously would take 30 mins, now takes a week. For example we had a performance issue with a DB, previously I'd just create a GSI (global secondary index), now there is a 37 page document with explanation, mitigation, planning, steps, reviews, risks, deployment plan, obstacles and a bunch of comments, but sure it looks cool and very professional.
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#373Models aren’t reliable, and it’s a bottleneck. My solution was to write code to force the model down a deterministic path. It’s open source here: https://codeleash.dev It’s working! ~200k LOC python/typescript codebase built from scratch as I’ve grown out the framework. I probably wrote 500-1000 lines of that, so ~99.5% written by Claude Code. I commit 10k-30k loc per week, code-reviewed and industrial strength quali…
My most productive day last week was a net of -10k lines (yes, minus ten thousand). No AI used.
Congratulations, honestly, but I would not do that for a job.
Metaphorically speaking, you’re out there sprinting on the road while people who’ve made agentic coding work for them are sipping coffee in a limo.
People who haven’t made agentic coding work (but do it anyway) are sipping coffee in the back of a limo that has no brakes. No thanks to that.
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#374I'm a manager at a large consumer website. My team and I have built a harness that uses headless Claude's (running Opus) to do ticket work, respond to and fix PR comments, and fix CI test failures. Our only interaction with code is writing specs in Jira tickets (which we primarily do via local Claudes) and adding PR comments to GitHub PRs. The speed we can move at is astounding. We're going to finish our backlog next…
> and adding PR comments to GitHub PRs...
> So much of what we did was to make code easier for the next dev, and that just doesn't matter anymore
Humans don't need to read the code when leaving PR comments?
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#375[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you shove clearly AI generated content at me, I will use an AI to summarize it. Or I'll walk up to your desk and ask you to explain it.
I actually think there’s almost an acceptable workflow here of using LLMs as part of the medium of communication. I’m pretty much fine with someone sending me 500 lines of slop with the stated expectation that I’ll dump it into an LLM on my end and interact with it. It’s the asymmetric expectations—that one person can spew slop but the other must go full-effort—that for me personally feels disrespectful.
I also don't mind that. Summarized information exchange feels very efficient. But for sure, it seems like a societal expectation is emerging around these tools right now - expect me to put as much effort into consuming data as you did producing it. If you shat out a bunch of data from an LLM, I'm going to use an LLM to consume that data as well. And it's not reasonable for you to expect me to manually parse that data, just as well as I wouldn't expect you to do the same.
However, since people are not going to readily reveal that they used an LLM to produce said output, it seems like the most logical way to do this is just always use an LLM to consume inputs, because there's no easy 100% way to tell whether it was created by an LLM or a human or not anymore.
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#377It's fun, but testing has become more of a PITA. When I write code I test and understand each piece. With AI generated code I need to figure out how it works and why it isn't working.
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#378Haven't seen this mentioned yet, but the worst part for me is that a lot of management LOVES to use Claude to generate 50 page design documents, PRDs, etc., and send them to us to "please review as soon as you can". Nobody reads it, not even the people making it. I'm watching some employees just generate endless slide decks of nonsense and then waffle when asked any specific questions. If any of that is read, it is b…
I've found in my (admittedly limited) use of LLMs that they're great for writing code if I don't forsee a need to review it myself either, but if I'm going to be editing the code myself later I need to be the one writing it. Also LLMs are bad at design.
> Also LLMs are bad at design.
I've found that SoTA LLMs sometimes implement / design differently (in the sense that "why didn't I think of that"), and that's always refreshing to see. I may run the same prompt through Gemini, Sonnet, and Codex just to see if they'd come up with some technique I didn't even know to consider.
> don't forsee a need to review it myself either
On the flip side, SoTA LLMs are crazy good at code review and bug fixes. I always use "find and fix business logic errors, edge cases, and api / language misuse" prompt after every substantial commit.
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#379Haven't seen this mentioned yet, but the worst part for me is that a lot of management LOVES to use Claude to generate 50 page design documents, PRDs, etc., and send them to us to "please review as soon as you can". Nobody reads it, not even the people making it. I'm watching some employees just generate endless slide decks of nonsense and then waffle when asked any specific questions. If any of that is read, it is b…
I've found in my (admittedly limited) use of LLMs that they're great for writing code if I don't forsee a need to review it myself either, but if I'm going to be editing the code myself later I need to be the one writing it. Also LLMs are bad at design.
Master Foo and the Programming Prodigy:
https://catb.org/~esr/writings/unix-koans/prodigy.html
Re: Ask HN: How is AI-assisted coding going for you professionally?
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you shove clearly AI generated content at me, I will use an AI to summarize it. Or I'll walk up to your desk and ask you to explain it.
I actually think there’s almost an acceptable workflow here of using LLMs as part of the medium of communication. I’m pretty much fine with someone sending me 500 lines of slop with the stated expectation that I’ll dump it into an LLM on my end and interact with it. It’s the asymmetric expectations—that one person can spew slop but the other must go full-effort—that for me personally feels disrespectful.
If you write 3 bullet points and produce 500-pages of slop why would my AI summarise it back to the original 3 bullet points and not something else entirely?