3 ms·
> there is almost nothing that a human is better at than Opus 4.6. Lolwut. I keep having to correct Claude at trivial code organization tasks. The code it writ
by loloquwowndueo 8mo ago
> there is almost nothing that a human is better at than Opus 4.6.
Lolwut. I keep having to correct Claude at trivial code organization tasks. The code it writes is correct; it’s just ham-fisted and violates DRY in unholy ways.
And I’m not even a great coder…
- causal 8mo ago> violates DRY in unholy ways Well said
- danenania 8mo agoI’m very pro AI coding and use it all day long, but I also wouldn’t say “the code it writes is correct”. It will produce all kinds of bugs, vulnerabilities, performance problems, memory leaks, etc unless carefully guided.
- ryanSrich 8mo agoSo it's even more human than we thought
- ryanSrich 8mo agoThis is entirely solvable with skills, memory, context, and further prompting. All of which can be done in a way that's reliable and repeatable. You wouldn't expect a Jr. dev to be the best at keeping things dry either.
- causal 8mo ago> there is almost nothing that a human is better at than Opus 4.6. > You wouldn't expect a Jr. dev to be the best at keeping things dry either. So a junior dev is better than almost all humans at everything?
- loloquwowndueo 8mo agoYea the “you’re holding it wrong” argument. Never takes long to pop up. > You wouldn't expect a Jr. dev to be the best at keeping things dry either. Did you read the comment I replied to? The premise was > there is almost nothing that a human is better at than Opus 4.6. So which is it? Is Claude the junior dev “better at” most things than a human or not? Sorry, you can’t play your argument both ways.