61–70 of 71 posts
what is your opinion about the research paper that got published recently which claims that AI coding actually slows you down 20%
Also that study was from early 2025 before Claude 4 which to me was a big break through in productivity, I did not really find these tools too useful before using sonnet 4.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly I've found that Claude is very good at writing valid Ada, it just writes complete garbage that doesn't follow the specification at all. As an example I asked it to change the handling of command line arguments in a program so that duplicates would cause an error rather than being ignored. If I recall correctly it took 6 course corrections to get to what I asked for, but each time it wrote valid code tha…
I'm pretty convinced the only developers who think we're on the cusp of AGI code exclusively in Python or JavaScript.
Maybe the future is fine-tuned models on specific coding styles?
what is your opinion about the research paper that got published recently which claims that AI coding actually slows you down 20%
That’s like saying a vim expert would be slower in VS Code - technically the IDE does more, but expertise with your existing tools often beats learning new ones. Also that study was from early 2025 before Claude 4 which to me was a big break through in productivity, I did not really find these tools too useful before using sonnet 4.
Pretty surprised BMAD-method wasn't mentioned. For my money it's by far the best Claude Code compliment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you can try to read other comments below your original comment, as they mostly share the same point and I don't bother to repeat what everyone else has said. I'll put it concisely: Trying to build predictable result upon unpredictable, not fully understood mechanisms is an extremely common practice in every single field. But anyway you think LLM is just coin toss so I won't engage with this sub-thread anymore.
And you should read replies to those replies, including yours. Nothing in the current AI world is as predictable as, say, the medicine you can buy or you get prescribed. None of the shamanic "just one more prompt bro" rituals have the predicting power of physics laws. Etc. You could reflect on that . > But anyway you think LLM is just coin toss A person telling me to "try to read comments" couldn't read and understan…
Do you know there are approve drugs that have been put in the market for treating one ailment and that have proven to have effect on another or have been shown to have unwanted side effect, and therefore have been shifted? The whole drugs _market_ is full of them and all that is needed is to have enough trial to prove desired effect...
The LLM output is yours to decide if it is relevant to your work or not, but it seems that your experience is consistently subpar with what others have reported.
isn't this textbook "bitter lesson" playing out here again? whatever "frameworks" people try to build, the next generation of models will make them obsolete, no? --- link: http://www.incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly I've found that Claude is very good at writing valid Ada, it just writes complete garbage that doesn't follow the specification at all. As an example I asked it to change the handling of command line arguments in a program so that duplicates would cause an error rather than being ignored. If I recall correctly it took 6 course corrections to get to what I asked for, but each time it wrote valid code tha…
I'm pretty convinced the only developers who think we're on the cusp of AGI code exclusively in Python or JavaScript.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s like saying a vim expert would be slower in VS Code - technically the IDE does more, but expertise with your existing tools often beats learning new ones. Also that study was from early 2025 before Claude 4 which to me was a big break through in productivity, I did not really find these tools too useful before using sonnet 4.
but has that cut down your prompting time, i assume an AI agent would take a fixed amount of time to generate N lines of code. Constructing effective prompts is probably where most time is spent, has this time been cut down with newer releases or has it been proved somehow that we need N less prompts to achieve the same result with newer AI models?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And you should read replies to those replies, including yours. Nothing in the current AI world is as predictable as, say, the medicine you can buy or you get prescribed. None of the shamanic "just one more prompt bro" rituals have the predicting power of physics laws. Etc. You could reflect on that . > But anyway you think LLM is just coin toss A person telling me to "try to read comments" couldn't read and understan…
> Nothing in the current AI world is as predictable as, say, the medicine you can buy or you get prescribed. Do you know there are approve drugs that have been put in the market for treating one ailment and that have proven to have effect on another or have been shown to have unwanted side effect, and therefore have been shifted? The whole drugs _market_ is full of them and all that is needed is to have enough trial…
Yes, I know. Doesn't really disprove my point
> all that is needed is to have enough trial to prove desired effect
all that is needed lol. You mean multi-stage trials with baselines, control groups, testing against placebos etc.?
Compared to "yolo just believe me" of LLMs.
> The LLM output is yours to decide if it is relevant to your work or not, but it seems that your experience is consistently subpar with what others have reported.
Indeed, because all we have to do with those reports is have blind unquestionable faith. "Just one more prompt, and I swear it will be 100% more efficient with literally othing to judge efficiency by, no baselines, nothing".