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

How well do coding agents use your library?

stackbench.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 62 posts

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#41

Post by richardblythman »

9rx wrote: post #18

What do coding agents need my library for? Don't they know how to write their own code? Isn't that a coding agent's entire purpose in life? There must be conflicting definitions out there. What does "coding agent" mean in this context?

do we want every coding agent writing everything from scratch for every project?

or would reusability/modularity across projects and teams be beneficial?

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#42

Post by richardblythman »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #40

Why on earth would we adapt libraries to the LLMs, rather than improving the LLMs to do their jobs correctly? This seems completely backwards to me.

i think you prob need a bit of both. would you add llms.txt to your docs or make it crawl like a human?

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#43

Post by nextworddev »

k3liutZu wrote: post #7
metadat wrote: post #4

The skip-to-the-end answer: Context7 MCP is so good it seems like magic, even to many well-informed, highly capable hackers. Simply wildly good for libraries and SDKs. All it takes to start using it is to add the MCP provider to your agent config and save your arms, "Use Context7 for this". https://context7.com/

What is the best approach to have something like context7 for internal tools and libraries?

context7 is open source: https://github.com/upstash/context7

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#44

Post by 9rx »

richardblythman wrote: post #41
9rx wrote: post #18

What do coding agents need my library for? Don't they know how to write their own code? Isn't that a coding agent's entire purpose in life? There must be conflicting definitions out there. What does "coding agent" mean in this context?

do we want every coding agent writing everything from scratch for every project? or would reusability/modularity across projects and teams be beneficial?

The human desire for interoperability would prevent writing everything from scratch, but to the extent that is reasonably possible, yes. We would already do that now if humans weren't a limiting factor. But coding agents, as I know the term, is about removing humans from the equation of writing code. I did ask if there is another interpretation for "coding agent" being used.

Of course, distinct projects is a human construct that computers don't care about. As coding agents evolve (if they do), it isn't likely that the idea of projects will persist long-term.

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#45

Post by hoppp »

I get so much hallucination from gpt-5 about library APIs ...

Please write the Apis for people so we can go see when the LLM fails.

If you write it for the llm, the moment is starts lying the whole thing is broken, if its not for me I dont go digging in, I rather use something else

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#46

Post by sethops1 »

richardblythman wrote: post #42
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #40

Why on earth would we adapt libraries to the LLMs, rather than improving the LLMs to do their jobs correctly? This seems completely backwards to me.

i think you prob need a bit of both. would you add llms.txt to your docs or make it crawl like a human?

Nah. I write software and docs for humans.

Re: How well do coding agents use your library?

#50

Post by chowells »

Why would I care? I write libraries to help humans write code. If an LLM was actually good at writing code, it would engage with the library in the same way as a human. If it can't, that's not a problem with the library. I don't lose anything if an LLM doesn't use a library I've written.
Post reply on HN