91–100 of 184 posts
I tried to make an app in claude code like they so much fanfare it could do, and it failed. It was obvious it will fail, I wanted something that I think it was not done before, using the Youtube api. But it failed nonetheless. I am tired of pretending that this can actually pull any meaningful work besides a debug companion or a slightly enhanced google/stackoverflow.
I was skeptical about Claude code and then I spent a week really learning how to use it. Within the week I had built a backend with FastAPI that supported user creation, password reset, email confirmation, a front end, and support for ouath into a few systems.
It definitely took me some time to learn how to make it work, but I’m astounded at how much work I got done and for so little typing.
I tried to make an app in claude code like they so much fanfare it could do, and it failed. It was obvious it will fail, I wanted something that I think it was not done before, using the Youtube api. But it failed nonetheless. I am tired of pretending that this can actually pull any meaningful work besides a debug companion or a slightly enhanced google/stackoverflow.
I tried to make an app in claude code like they so much fanfare it could do, and it failed. It was obvious it will fail, I wanted something that I think it was not done before, using the Youtube api. But it failed nonetheless. I am tired of pretending that this can actually pull any meaningful work besides a debug companion or a slightly enhanced google/stackoverflow.
But you do know, that this is what LLMs ain't good at.
So your conclusion is somewhat off, because there are plenty of programming work of things that were done before and require just tweaking.
I mean, I am also not hooked yet and just occasionally use chatGPT/claude for concrete stuff, but I do find it useful and I do see, where it can get really useful for me (once it really knows my codebase and the libaries used and does not jump between incompatible API versions)
I tried to make an app in claude code like they so much fanfare it could do, and it failed. It was obvious it will fail, I wanted something that I think it was not done before, using the Youtube api. But it failed nonetheless. I am tired of pretending that this can actually pull any meaningful work besides a debug companion or a slightly enhanced google/stackoverflow.
Interesting how long ago did you do this? How long did you spend on it? I was skeptical about Claude code and then I spent a week really learning how to use it. Within the week I had built a backend with FastAPI that supported user creation, password reset, email confirmation, a front end, and support for ouath into a few systems. It definitely took me some time to learn how to make it work, but I’m astounded at how…
>before this you had to trust that claude would follow your readme instructions about running linters or tests. hit and miss at best. now its deterministic. pre hook blocks bad actions post hook validates results. >hooks let you build workflows where multiple agents can hand off work safely. one agent writes code another reviews it another deploys it. each step gated by verification hooks.
I feel that currently improvement mostly comes from slapping what to me feels like workarounds on top of something that very well may be a local maximum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an ex-Cursor user myself, is there any reason that you’re still using it? Genuinely curious.
I've been using cursor for last 1 year but haven't tried Claude Code, Do you think it has gotten better?
The time it saved me in first few hours of use easily made the monthly fee worthwhile. I did hit a limit near the four-hour mark (resets every five hours for us Pro subscribers), but just went and reviewed the ~1700 lines it added in that time and cleaned up the config files (updated todos etc)
>before this you had to trust that claude would follow your readme instructions about running linters or tests. hit and miss at best. now its deterministic. pre hook blocks bad actions post hook validates results. >hooks let you build workflows where multiple agents can hand off work safely. one agent writes code another reviews it another deploys it. each step gated by verification hooks.
This nicely describes where we're at with LLM's as I see it: they are 'fancy' enough to be able to write code yet at the same time they can't be trusted to do stuff which can be solved with a simple hook. I feel that currently improvement mostly comes from slapping what to me feels like workarounds on top of something that very well may be a local maximum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This nicely describes where we're at with LLM's as I see it: they are 'fancy' enough to be able to write code yet at the same time they can't be trusted to do stuff which can be solved with a simple hook. I feel that currently improvement mostly comes from slapping what to me feels like workarounds on top of something that very well may be a local maximum.
Someone described LLMs in the coding space as stone soup. So much stuff is being created around then to make them work better that at some point it feels like you'll be able to remove the LLM part of the equation
I think this insistance on near autonomous agents is setting the bar too high, which wouldnt be an issue if these companies werent then insisting that the bar is set just right.
These things understand language perfectly, theyve solved NLP because thats what they model extremely well. But agentic stuff is modelled by reinforcement learning and until thats in the foundation model itself (at the token prediction level) these things have no real understanding of state spaces being a recursive function of action spaces and such stuff. And they cant autonomously code or drive or manage a fund until they do
As an aside, people say AI will eliminate coding jobs, but then who will configure these hooks? Or think about adding such a feature? These kinds of tooling and related work will still be there unless AI evolves to the point that it even thinks of this and announces this to all other AI entities and they also implement it properly etc.
To misuse a woodworking metaphor, I think we’re experiencing a shift from hand tools to power tools. You still need someone who understands the basics to get the good results out of the tools, but they’re not chiseling fine furniture by hand anymore, they’re throwing heaps of wood through the tablesaw instead. More productive, but more likely to lose a finger if you’re not careful.