61–70 of 204 posts
I'm typically pretty gentle in real code reviews but that one is a serious "what the fuck are you even doing" if it were a human.
Adding a top-level context-rule in claude.md doesn't fix it reliably.
Like others I agree humans are not getting replaced anytime soon though. For all the current hype current AI technology is pretty dumb. Give it a decade or so though and everything we are currently doing will seem like Stone Age technology.
Aside: sometimes I really wonder if humanity is trying to automate itself out of existence.
I use Cursor for most of my development these days. This article aligns pretty closely with my experiences. A few additional observations: 1. Anecdotally, AI agents feel stuck somewhere circa ~2021. If I install newer packages, Claude will revert to outdated packages/implementations that were popular four years ago. This is incredibly frustrating to watch and correct for. Providing explicit instructions for which pac…
But how long before AI is Good Enough that the point is irrelevant?
i have mentored a few people to become Programmers. Some for months, some for years. It's like teaching someone to ride a bycicle. Hand-holding first, then hand-guiding, then short flights, then longer... Different people pick stuff at different pace and shape.. but they do learn.. if they want to. What i completely miss in these LLM parrots-agents-generators, is the learning. You can't teach them anything. They woul…
LLMs don't learn but agents do. You just need to insert that new knowledge in the prompt.
It’s frustrating
I use Cursor for most of my development these days. This article aligns pretty closely with my experiences. A few additional observations: 1. Anecdotally, AI agents feel stuck somewhere circa ~2021. If I install newer packages, Claude will revert to outdated packages/implementations that were popular four years ago. This is incredibly frustrating to watch and correct for. Providing explicit instructions for which pac…
I've been playing around with vibe coding and I think a lot of the issues brought up could be fixed by an architecture abstraction layer that does not exist today. My idea would be something like an architecture-graph (Archigraph working title) that would recursively describe how an application works or should work. Then when an agentic coder is doing a task they can easily see the bigger picture of how an applicatio…
I use Cursor for most of my development these days. This article aligns pretty closely with my experiences. A few additional observations: 1. Anecdotally, AI agents feel stuck somewhere circa ~2021. If I install newer packages, Claude will revert to outdated packages/implementations that were popular four years ago. This is incredibly frustrating to watch and correct for. Providing explicit instructions for which pac…
Clone the dependency you want to use in the directory of your code.
Instruct it to go into the directory and look at that code in order to complete task X: "I've got a new directory xyz, in it contains a library to do feature abc. I'll need to include it here to do A to function B and so on"
The weird version mixing bug will disappear. If it's closed source, then just do the documentation.
You need to line up the breadcrumbs right.
#2 is "create a patch file that does X. Do not apply it". Followed by "apply the previous patch file". Manually splitting the task fixes the attention.
Another method is to modify the code. Don't use "to-do" it will get confused. Instead use something meaningless like 1gwvDn, then at the appropriate place
[1gwvDn: insert blah here]
Then go to the agent and say
"I've changed the file and given you instructions in the form [1gwvDn:]. Go through the code and do each individually.
Then the breadcrumbs are right and it doesn't start deleting giant blocks of code and breaking things
#3 You will never start anything unless you convince yourself it's going to be easy. I know some people will disagree with this. They're wrong. You need to tell yourself it's doable before you attempt it.
#4 is because we lose ownership of the code and end up playing manager. So we do the human thing of asking the computer to do increasingly trivial things because it's "the computer's" code. Realize you're doing that and don't be dumb about it.
I've been playing around with vibe coding and I think a lot of the issues brought up could be fixed by an architecture abstraction layer that does not exist today. My idea would be something like an architecture-graph (Archigraph working title) that would recursively describe how an application works or should work. Then when an agentic coder is doing a task they can easily see the bigger picture of how an applicatio…
I suppose it is Thoughtworks after all working to expand mindshare by defining buzzwords.