3 ms·
1. Preventing agents from crossing boundaries, creating implicit and explicit dependencies, and building false layers requires much more human control over ever
by sarchertech 7mo ago
1. Preventing agents from crossing boundaries, creating implicit and explicit dependencies, and building false layers requires much more human control over every PR and involvement with the code than you seem to espouse.
2. Assuming that techniques that work with human developers that have severely impaired judgement but are massively faster at producing code is a bad idea.
3. There’s no way you have enough experience with maintaining code written in this way to confidently hand wave away concerns.
- raw_anon_1111 7mo agoAbsolutely no one in the value chain cares about “how many layers of abstractions your code has - not your management or your customers. They care about functional and none functional requirements
- sarchertech 7mo agoOf course they don’t. Please reread what I said, give it the slightest bit of thought, and re-respond if you want a response from me.
- raw_anon_1111 7mo agoBy definition, coding agents are right now the worse they will ever be and the industry as a whole by definition is the least experienced it will ever be at using then. So many people on HN are so insulted that the people who put money in our bank accounts and in some cases stock in our brokerage accounts ever cared about their bespoke clean code, GOF patterns and they never did. LLM just made it more apparent. It’s always been dumb for PR to be focused on for loops vs while loops instead of focusing on whether functional and non functional requirements are met
- sarchertech 7mo agoWow you have completely lost the plot. It’s like you’re a bot that’s mixing up who he’s replying to.
- raw_anon_1111 7mo agoJust maybe you aren’t making the strong argument you think you are making
- sarchertech 7mo agoI wouldn’t know sir, because you didn’t address a single lick of it. You went off and argued with some other argument you constructed in your head. I believe we have a name for that. It is an awfully good way to win arguments in your own mind and retain unshakable confidence in your position if that’s your goal though.
- raw_anon_1111 7mo agoAgain exactly what argument are you making then? Maybe you should spend more time being clear about your argument? An LLM might help…
- sarchertech 7mo agoWell there’s a numbered list if you’ll read back a few messages. That should be easy for even the most LLM addled brain to digest. But instead you went off and had your own party arguing with someone (it certainly wasn’t me) about number of layers, GoF patterns, and “clean” code.
- rixed 7mo agoI solve this issue (agent looking at too much and changing too much) with the best abstraction ever invented : files and permissions. One task is usually composed of 2 input files, a specification and a header file, and the task is to output the implementation and nothing more. Agent user has no other permissions in the file system, has no tools, just output the code that's directed into a file. I run ´make' whenever I update a specification. Token count is minimal. Do I save time? Not much, but having to specify and argue about everything is interesting, and I trust myself that I'm not loosing any knowledge this way; be it the why or the how.