Live data from Hacker News

Agentic Coding Recommendations

lucumr.pocoo.org

51–60 of 210 posts

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#51
post #33

I've been trying Claude Code with Sonnet 4.0 for a week or so now for Rust code but it feels really underwhelming (and expensive since it's via Bedrock right now). Everytime it's doing something it's missing half despite spending a lot of time planning at the beginning of the session. What am I missing?

it shouldn't be expensive - you can pay for Pro ($20/month) or Max ($100 or $200/month) to get what would cost >> $1000/month in API costs.

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#52
post #44
post #16

So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…

> no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Here is a Youtube video that makes the same argument. React is / will be the last Javascript framework, because it is the dominant one right now. Even of people publish new frameworks, LLM coding assistants will not be able to assist coding using the new frameworks, so the new frameworks will not find users or popularity. And even for React, it will be…

> LLM coding assistants will not be able to assist coding using the new frameworks

Why not? When my coding agent discovers that they used the wrong API or used the right API wrong, it digs up the dependency source on disk (works at least with Rust and with JavaScript) and looks up the new details.

I also have it use my own private libraries the same way, and those are not in any training data guaranteed.

I guess if whatever platform/software you use doesn't have tool calling youre kind of right, but also missing something kind of commonplace today.

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#53
post #29
post #16

So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…

Speaking of which, anyone had success using these tools for coding Common Lisp?

Agents no, LLMs yes. Not for generating code per se, but for answering questions. Common Lisp doesn't seem to have a strong influx of n00bs like me, and even though there's pretty excellent documentation, I find it sometimes hard to know what I'm looking for. LLMs definitely helped me a few times by answering my n00b questions I would have otherwise had to ask online.

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#54
post #16

So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…

My best results have been with Ruby/Rails and either vanilla Bootstrap, or something like Tabler UI, Tailwind seems to be fine as well, but I'm still not a fan of the verbosity. With a stable enough boilerplate you can come up with outstanding results in a few hours. Truly production ready stuff for small size apps.

How are you getting results when Ruby has no type system? That seems like where half the value of LLM coding agents are (dumping in type errors and it solving them).

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#55
post #16

So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…

> Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? That's a very good question. Rephrased: as good training data will diminish exponentially with the Internet being inundated by LLM regurgitations, will "AI savvy" coders prefer old, boring languages and tech because there's more low-radiation training data from the pre-LLM era? The m…

> Rephrased: as good training data will diminish exponentially with the Internet being inundated by LLM regurgitations

I don't think the premise is accurate in this specific case.

First, if anything, training data for newer libs can only increase. Presumably code reaches github in a "at least it compiles" state. So you have lots of people fight the AIs and push code that at least compiles. You can then filter for the newer libs and train on that.

Second, pre-training is already mostly solved. The pudding seems to be now in post-training. And for coding a lot of post-training is done with RL / other unsupervised techniques. You get enough signals from using generate -> check loops that you can do that reliably.

The idea that "we're running out of data" is way too overblown IMO, especially considering the last ~6mo-1y advances we've seen so far. Keep in mind that the better your "generation" pipeline becomes, the better will later models be. And the current "agentic" loop based systems are getting pretty darn good.

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My best results have been with Ruby/Rails and either vanilla Bootstrap, or something like Tabler UI, Tailwind seems to be fine as well, but I'm still not a fan of the verbosity. With a stable enough boilerplate you can come up with outstanding results in a few hours. Truly production ready stuff for small size apps.

How are you getting results when Ruby has no type system? That seems like where half the value of LLM coding agents are (dumping in type errors and it solving them).

Bunch of unit, functional and E2E tests, just like before LLMs :) Haven't tried with Ruby specifically but works well with JavaScript and other dynamic languages so should work fine with Ruby too.

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#57
post #29
post #16

So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…

Speaking of which, anyone had success using these tools for coding Common Lisp?

Not CL specifically but works well with Clojure and fits better than non-lisp languages (imo) once you give the LLM direct access to the repl

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#58
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exact same experience. I have no clue what other people are doing. I was hunting for use cases where it could be used and it kept not working. I don't get it.

Is it only Rust that you've had this experience with or is it a general thing?

I had been trying with Rust, but after this article I think I might change tack and attempt a project in Go...

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#59
post #33

I've been trying Claude Code with Sonnet 4.0 for a week or so now for Rust code but it feels really underwhelming (and expensive since it's via Bedrock right now). Everytime it's doing something it's missing half despite spending a lot of time planning at the beginning of the session. What am I missing?

it shouldn't be expensive - you can pay for Pro ($20/month) or Max ($100 or $200/month) to get what would cost >> $1000/month in API costs.

Can you use Claude Code with Pro? I was trying to figure this out and I thought you couldn't (unless you enter an API key and pay for tokens).

Re: Agentic Coding Recommendations

#60
post #3

I find it excellent news that all the techniques that make agentic coding more efficient also make human coding more efficient. There was a worry that code would become big mud balls that only AI understand, but it looks like the opposite. Clear code is important for AI productivity, so it now matters even more, because the difference of productivity is immediately and objectively measurable. Before AIs what code was…

> There was a worry that code would become big mud balls

That's always been a worry with programming (see basically all Rich Hickey talks), and is still a problem since people prefer "moving fast today" instead of "not having 10 tons of technical debt tomorrow"

LLMs makes it even easier for people to spend the entire day producing boilerplate without stopping for a second to rethink why they are producing so much boilerplate. If the pain goes away, why fix it?

Post reply on HN