SamuraiBeandog

u/SamuraiBeandog@lemmy.world
108 posts · 927 comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

Claude is actually very good at analysing and documenting a codebase. Get it to do a high level analysis and document, and then more granular versions of that for sub sections, down to the level of detail where you think you need. Tell it to document just the functionality and business rules, rather than the code itself.

You can verify the details by hand and with your friend to be confident you've got the business rules correct. Then use Claude in a similar way to create technical design documentation from the business rules docs, starting at a high level design and then creating more detailed subsections. You can give it specific technical direction through this process, with the kinds of architecture and patterns you want to use.

If you haven't worked with Claude much, its important to know how to work with it for good results. Always break up your sessions with it. Just having a single conversation that you keep working on for days or weeks will give increasingly poor results as the amount of information it has to keep track of blows out. Have targetted discussions that generate an output (usually documentation) and then start a new conversation that uses the output from the previous discussion, but focuses on a more granular aspect of it. As you generate documents, have claude update its "claude.md" file, which is a project file with any info you want to include in every conversation. Having an index to your documents so it knows which document to look for for a specific subject will save you a lot of time and tokens.

This is whow I would reverse vibe code a vibe codebase. It sounds like you haven't used Claude much, it is actually very capable when managed correctly by a skilled programmer. I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

Cue the downvotes.

The difference between auto-generating hundreds to thousands of words, versus having to manually read and type all of those words out yourself is very obviously a lot more than "nothing".

And that's not even taking into account the fact that we don't know what their method of watermarking is. From how they're talking it sounds like it will be algorithmically embedded in the text itself somehow, through specific choices of words or something similar. If that's the case, typing it out word for word will retain the watermark.

Sure, but you're always going to get people that are bad at their job, AI coding models haven't changed that. The point I was trying to make is that people saying that AI can't be used to write high quality code are just wrong.

on AI Code Is Insane Trash · c/hackernews · -2 pts · 11d

I'm a software engineer with 20 years in the industry. I use Claude every day and the majority of the code I write is generated by it. When you set it up and manage it correctly it writes code of a quality that varies from fine to excellent. You still need to have a human reviewing it but it is just radically more productive than what I could put out myself.

Pure vibe coding will quickly end up with a complete mess. But in the hands of a good engineer that understands how to manage it and can give it explicit technical direction in how to write the code, it usually writes high quality code and is a huge productivity multiplier. Like any complex tool, knowing how to use the tool is a skill in itself. Almost everyone I know in the industry is using it and people who aren't will get left behind (I know that's a cliche but it's true).

There's a lot of problems with AI, ethically, financially and culturally. But people shouldn't delude themselves about its capabilities, that will actually make it more difficult to try and improve some of these problems.

I've been aware that the DK effect was in doubt/debunked for a while, but I still use the term to describe specific instances of people being overconfident in their ignorance, its just such a handy terminology for a very common situation.

The European royalty over the past thousand years participated in so many blood sacrifices the side effects literally snuck its way into their DNA.

Science checks out.

There's plenty of fast weapons in the game. The huge range of different playstyles with different builds is a big part of the appeal.

Elden Ring was just a lifeless world that used “open world exploration” to pad the playtime.

This is an ignorant take. It's fine if you didn't like the game but this is just objectively wrong. There's an enormous amount of information to be found exploring the world, it just isn't thrown in your face like most games.