3 ms·
That is true in some cases. However, there are many cases where writing the code IS the bottleneck. Experiments, trying different approaches, well defined cod
by linsomniac 1y ago
That is true in some cases. However, there are many cases where writing the code IS the bottleneck. Experiments, trying different approaches, well defined code.
Examples:
This morning Claude Code built a browser-based app that visualizes 3.8M lines of JSON dumps of AWS infrastructure. Attention required by me: 15 minutes. Results: Reasonable for a 1-shot.
A few weeks ago I had it build me a client/server app in multiple flavors from a well defined spec: async, threaded, and select, to see which one was the most clear and easy to maintain.
A few days ago I gave it a 2K line python CLI tool and said "Build me a web interface to this CLI program". It nearly one-shotted it (probably would have if I had the playwright MCP configured).
These are all things I never would have been able to pursue without the LLM tooling in the past because I just don't have time to write the code.
There are definitely cases where the code is not the bottleneck, but those aren't the only cases.
- shepherdjerred 1y agoI agree. Cursor has been amazing for me to write small test/validation scripts, write tedious code that wasn't very interesting to me, or perform some experiment. I can forget about the details and care more about architecture, how things connect, etc.