2 ms·

Yeah, but to be honest, I sometimes just tell Claude to cleanup / refactor stuff; it finds a lot of things, discusses it with me and I approve the plan, and it

Yeah, but to be honest, I sometimes just tell Claude to cleanup / refactor stuff; it finds a lot of things, discusses it with me and I approve the plan, and it churns away my tokens for some time. I do this once in a while, and I've been doing this for over 6 months and I don't feel like my development has significantly slowed down. Yeah my token usage is more for sure, but my codebase also is, so I'm not worried about that. To me AI seems to make maintenance very easy, like the rest. You just need to do it. Edit: I make it sound a bit simple maybe. I do more extensive redactors also, where I'm more involved and opinionated. But I don't feel the need to do that very often very deeply. But yeah sometimes it's definitely necessary to prevent the project from going off rails.

tossandthrow 5mo ago
This is my experience exactly. I have reduced our response time on our api to 30ms from 80ms and gotten a setup we can comfortably grow into. I had not had time to track down these optimizations without Claude code.
gitaarik 5mo ago
I'm getting downvotes for this. Why exactly?
hombre_fatal 5mo ago
Yeah, there's a double-standard I've been seeing in LLM discourse here: LLMs suck but they are also somehow expected to proactively do maintenance sweeps in your code over time and repay technical debt, presumably on your behalf. If you want to build well-architected, well-tested code or pay back debt, the LLMs make the world your oyster. And it's easier than ever since LLMs have no problem doing ridiculous cross-cutting refactoring that you'd never have done on your own. That LLMs essentially lead to code that's harder to maintain, or that human-produced code is easier to maintain by default just aren't claims I'd sign off on, and TFA doesn't try to render the argument. I'd argue the opposite since LLMs make it trivial to plan arch/tests for all the code changes you wouldn't have had the energy to do it for.

tossandthrow 5mo ago

This is my experience exactly. I have reduced our response time on our api to 30ms from 80ms and gotten a setup we can comfortably grow into. I had not had time to track down these optimizations without Claude code.

gitaarik 5mo ago

I'm getting downvotes for this. Why exactly?

hombre_fatal 5mo ago

Yeah, there's a double-standard I've been seeing in LLM discourse here: LLMs suck but they are also somehow expected to proactively do maintenance sweeps in your code over time and repay technical debt, presumably on your behalf. If you want to build well-architected, well-tested code or pay back debt, the LLMs make the world your oyster. And it's easier than ever since LLMs have no problem doing ridiculous cross-cutting refactoring that you'd never have done on your own. That LLMs essentially lead to code that's harder to maintain, or that human-produced code is easier to maintain by default just aren't claims I'd sign off on, and TFA doesn't try to render the argument. I'd argue the opposite since LLMs make it trivial to plan arch/tests for all the code changes you wouldn't have had the energy to do it for.