3 ms·

I feel like I do all of this stuff and still end up with unusable code in most cases, and the cases where I don't I still usually have to hand massage it into s

I feel like I do all of this stuff and still end up with unusable code in most cases, and the cases where I don't I still usually have to hand massage it into something usable. Sometimes it gets it right and it's really cool when it does, but anecdotally for me it doesn't seem to be making me any more efficient.

jaggederest 1y ago
The key is prompting. Prompt to within an inch of your life. Treat prompts as source code - edit them in files, use @ notation to bring them into the console. Use Claude to generate its own prompts - https://github.com/wshobson/commands/ https://github.com/wshobson/commands/ and https://github.com/wshobson/agents/ https://github.com/wshobson/agents/ are very handy, they include a prompt-engineer persona. I'm at the point now where I have to yell at the AI once in a while, but I touch essentially zero code manually, and it's acceptable quality. Once I stopped and tried to fully refactor a commit that CC had created, but I was only able to make marginal improvements in return for an enormous time commitment. If I had spent that time improving my prompts and running refactoring/cleanup passes in CC, I suspect I would have come out ahead. So I'm deliberately trying not to do that. I expect at some point on a Friday (last Friday was close) I will get frustrated and go build things manually. But for now it's a cognitive and effort reduction for similar quality. It helps to use the most standard libraries and languages possible, and great tests are a must. Edit: Also, use the "thinking" commands. think / think hard / think harder / ultrathink are your best friend when attempting complicated changes (of course, if you're attempting complicated changes, don't.)
- shaunxcode 1y ago
  I am convinced that this comment once read aloud in the cadence of Ginsberg is a work of art!
  - jaggederest 1y ago
    Now I'm trying to find a text-to-Ginsberg translator. Maybe he's who I sound like in my head.
- thayne 1y ago
  This works fairly well for well defined, repetitive tasks. But at least for me, if you have to put that much effort into the prompt, it is likely easier just to write the code myself.
  - NitpickLawyer 1y ago
    I've found it works really well for exploration as well. I'll give it a new library, and ask it to explore the library with "x goal" in mind. It then goes and agents away for a few minutes, and I get a mini-poc that more often than not does what I wanted and can also give me options.
  - masto 1y ago
    Sometimes I spend half an hour writing a prompt and realize that I’ve basically rubber-ducked the problem to the point where I know exactly what I want, so I just write the code myself. I have been doing my best to give these tools a fair shake, because I want to have an informed opinion (and certainly some fear of being left behind). I find that their utility in a given area is inversely proportional to my skill level. I have rewritten or fixed most of the backend business logic that AI spits out. Even if it’s mostly ok on a first pass, I’ve been doing this gig for decades now and I am pretty good at spotting future technical debt. On the other hand, I’m consistently impressed by its ability to save me time with UI code. Or maybe it’s not that it saves me time, but it gets me to do more ambitious things. I’d typically just throw stuff on the page with the excuse that I’m not a designer, and hope that eventually I can bring in someone else to make it look better. Now I can tell the robot I want to have drag and drop here and autocomplete there, and a share to flooberflop button, and it’ll do enough of the implementation that even if I have to fix it up, I’m not as intimidated to start.
    - theshrike79 1y ago
      I've had the Corporate Approved CoPilot + Sonnet 4 write a full working React page for me based on a screenshot of a Figma model. (Not even through an MCP) It even discovered that we have some internal components and used them for it. Got me from 0-MVP in less then an hour. Would've easily taken me a full day
- fragmede 1y ago
  How much voice control have you implemented?
  - jaggederest 1y ago
    None but it's on the list! Actually using it to prototype a complete audio visual tracking and annotation tool, so feeding it back into itself is a logical next step.
- rco8786 1y ago
  Have you made any attempt to quantify your efficiency/output vs writing the code yourself? I've done all of these things you've mentioned, with varying degrees of success. But also everything you're talking about doing is time consuming and eats away at whatever efficiency gain CC claims to offer.
  - jaggederest 1y ago
    Days instead of weeks, basically. Hard to truly quantify but I'm bloody minded enough to reimplement things three times to check and even with foresight the AI is faster.
enobrev 1y ago
> it doesn't seem to be making me any more efficient That's been my experience. I've been working on a 100% vibe-coded app for a few weeks. API, React-Native frontend, marketing website, CMS, CI/CD - all of it without changing a single line of code myself. Overall, the resulting codebase has been better than I expected before I started. But I would have accomplished everything it has (except for the detailed specs, detailed commit log, and thousands of tests), in about 1/3 of the time.
- fourthark 1y ago
  How long would it have taken if you had written “the detailed specs, detailed commit log, and thousands of tests”?
  - veber-alex 1y ago
    -1 time because it would have never have happened without AI
  - enobrev 1y ago
    The specs would not likely have happened at all, since this is a solo project; although this experience has led me to want to write these things out more thoroughly, even for myself. It's impressive how little work I need to put in going this route to have fairly thorough actionable specs for pretty much every major decision I've made through the process. The commits - some would be detailed, plenty would have been "typo" or "same as last commit, but works this time" The tests - Probably would have been decent for the API, but not as thorough. Likely non-existent for the UI. As for time - I agree with the other response - I wouldn't have taken the time.
- theshrike79 1y ago
  I'm not calling bullshit here, but something smells. If you really can write a full-ass system like that faster than an LLM, you're either REALLY fucking good at what you do (and an amazing typer), or you're holding the LLM wrong as they say.
  - 1y ago

jaggederest 1y ago

The key is prompting. Prompt to within an inch of your life. Treat prompts as source code - edit them in files, use @ notation to bring them into the console. Use Claude to generate its own prompts - https://github.com/wshobson/commands/ https://github.com/wshobson/commands/ and https://github.com/wshobson/agents/ https://github.com/wshobson/agents/ are very handy, they include a prompt-engineer persona. I'm at the point now where I have to yell at the AI once in a while, but I touch essentially zero code manually, and it's acceptable quality. Once I stopped and tried to fully refactor a commit that CC had created, but I was only able to make marginal improvements in return for an enormous time commitment. If I had spent that time improving my prompts and running refactoring/cleanup passes in CC, I suspect I would have come out ahead. So I'm deliberately trying not to do that. I expect at some point on a Friday (last Friday was close) I will get frustrated and go build things manually. But for now it's a cognitive and effort reduction for similar quality. It helps to use the most standard libraries and languages possible, and great tests are a must. Edit: Also, use the "thinking" commands. think / think hard / think harder / ultrathink are your best friend when attempting complicated changes (of course, if you're attempting complicated changes, don't.)

shaunxcode 1y ago
I am convinced that this comment once read aloud in the cadence of Ginsberg is a work of art!
- jaggederest 1y ago
  Now I'm trying to find a text-to-Ginsberg translator. Maybe he's who I sound like in my head.
thayne 1y ago
This works fairly well for well defined, repetitive tasks. But at least for me, if you have to put that much effort into the prompt, it is likely easier just to write the code myself.
- NitpickLawyer 1y ago
  I've found it works really well for exploration as well. I'll give it a new library, and ask it to explore the library with "x goal" in mind. It then goes and agents away for a few minutes, and I get a mini-poc that more often than not does what I wanted and can also give me options.
- masto 1y ago
  Sometimes I spend half an hour writing a prompt and realize that I’ve basically rubber-ducked the problem to the point where I know exactly what I want, so I just write the code myself. I have been doing my best to give these tools a fair shake, because I want to have an informed opinion (and certainly some fear of being left behind). I find that their utility in a given area is inversely proportional to my skill level. I have rewritten or fixed most of the backend business logic that AI spits out. Even if it’s mostly ok on a first pass, I’ve been doing this gig for decades now and I am pretty good at spotting future technical debt. On the other hand, I’m consistently impressed by its ability to save me time with UI code. Or maybe it’s not that it saves me time, but it gets me to do more ambitious things. I’d typically just throw stuff on the page with the excuse that I’m not a designer, and hope that eventually I can bring in someone else to make it look better. Now I can tell the robot I want to have drag and drop here and autocomplete there, and a share to flooberflop button, and it’ll do enough of the implementation that even if I have to fix it up, I’m not as intimidated to start.
  - theshrike79 1y ago
    I've had the Corporate Approved CoPilot + Sonnet 4 write a full working React page for me based on a screenshot of a Figma model. (Not even through an MCP) It even discovered that we have some internal components and used them for it. Got me from 0-MVP in less then an hour. Would've easily taken me a full day
fragmede 1y ago
How much voice control have you implemented?
- jaggederest 1y ago
  None but it's on the list! Actually using it to prototype a complete audio visual tracking and annotation tool, so feeding it back into itself is a logical next step.
rco8786 1y ago
Have you made any attempt to quantify your efficiency/output vs writing the code yourself? I've done all of these things you've mentioned, with varying degrees of success. But also everything you're talking about doing is time consuming and eats away at whatever efficiency gain CC claims to offer.
- jaggederest 1y ago
  Days instead of weeks, basically. Hard to truly quantify but I'm bloody minded enough to reimplement things three times to check and even with foresight the AI is faster.

enobrev 1y ago

> it doesn't seem to be making me any more efficient That's been my experience. I've been working on a 100% vibe-coded app for a few weeks. API, React-Native frontend, marketing website, CMS, CI/CD - all of it without changing a single line of code myself. Overall, the resulting codebase has been better than I expected before I started. But I would have accomplished everything it has (except for the detailed specs, detailed commit log, and thousands of tests), in about 1/3 of the time.

fourthark 1y ago
How long would it have taken if you had written “the detailed specs, detailed commit log, and thousands of tests”?
- veber-alex 1y ago
  -1 time because it would have never have happened without AI
- enobrev 1y ago
  The specs would not likely have happened at all, since this is a solo project; although this experience has led me to want to write these things out more thoroughly, even for myself. It's impressive how little work I need to put in going this route to have fairly thorough actionable specs for pretty much every major decision I've made through the process. The commits - some would be detailed, plenty would have been "typo" or "same as last commit, but works this time" The tests - Probably would have been decent for the API, but not as thorough. Likely non-existent for the UI. As for time - I agree with the other response - I wouldn't have taken the time.
theshrike79 1y ago
I'm not calling bullshit here, but something smells. If you really can write a full-ass system like that faster than an LLM, you're either REALLY fucking good at what you do (and an amazing typer), or you're holding the LLM wrong as they say.
- 1y ago