3 ms·

I've "vibed" some non-trivial stuff lately using a combination of Codex with 5.5 and Claude Code with Opus 4.7. Key has been to spend a fair amount of time on

I've "vibed" some non-trivial stuff lately using a combination of Codex with 5.5 and Claude Code with Opus 4.7. Key has been to spend a fair amount of time on initial overall design document, which is split into tangible and limited phases. I go back and forth between them on this document until we're all happy. For each phase an implementation plan is made. At the end, a summary document of what was delivered and what was discovered. This becomes input to next phase. I do check the documents, and what they're doing. I also check the tests, some more thorough. And some spot checks on the code to see if I like the structure. I have mainly used Claude for coding and Codex for design and code review after phases. I ask both to check test coverage after phases. Managed to implement some tools and libraries without writing a single line of code this way, which have been very beneficial to us. Since it's so async I can work on other stuff while they plod along. I think it's not universal though. But stuff that can be tested easily and which you have a firm grasp of what you want to achieve, but not necessarily exactly how, that I've been impressed with.

nothinkjustai 5mo ago
None of it is non-trivial tho. You might think so, but it’s not.
- magicalhippo 5mo ago
  It wasn't trivial in that I used a lot of my programming and domain knowledge, both when iterating on the design document and skimming implementation plans. I didn't use it often, but when it was needed it was needed.
manmal 5mo ago
That’s not vibing, but waterfall development.
- whatshisface 5mo ago
  Waterfall was famous for wasting developer time and extending delivery dates in exchange for simplifying management. If Claude time is comparatively inexpensive, but human oversight remains necessary, we will switch back to waterfall because the relative importance of the two resources will invert.
- magicalhippo 5mo ago
  It's vibing in the sense that I'm not really writing code, and I'm leaving a lot of decision to the models. I let them drive a lot of the design document details, I just made sure it contained the salient points. Implementation plans I just skimmed. Didn't write any code, just did some checks here and there. But yes, I did think that it sorta felt like being a team lead for some eager programmers.
WesolyKubeczek 5mo ago
> Key has been to spend a fair amount of time on initial overall design document, which is split into tangible and limited phases. > For each phase an implementation plan is made. At the end, a summary document of what was delivered and what was discovered. > I do check the documents, and what they're doing. I also check the tests, some more thorough. Sounds like programming, but with extra steps.
- dawnerd 5mo ago
  Also the least fun part of development. Maybe I’m the weird one but I like to just jump right in, planning every last detail before writing code is boring.
  - mrcsharp 5mo ago
    > planning every last detail before writing code is boring Not only that but you can't really plan everything. It is impossible. Without LLMs, with every line of code you are making a decision or discovering something new that must be dealt with or realizing how the current thing might impact something else and so on. There is no way for a programmer to consider all of these little things ahead of time and if an attempt is made, it will take as long as actually writing that code.
    - magicalhippo 5mo ago
      > Without LLMs, with every line of code you are making a decision or discovering something new that must be dealt with or realizing how the current thing might impact something else and so on. Part of this is true, part of it the agents catch at least a non-trivial portion of. If you prompt it to do a review, especially with a specific angle like ensuring sustained write performance, or how it will work when the future extensions are implemented, they do often catch a lot of issues. I agree you lose a fair bit of the sense of "it feels like I'm doing something wrong", or "this doesn't seem optimal" etc. I think the skill in using these tools is to determine when you need that control and where it doesn't really matter.
  - magicalhippo 5mo ago
nopurpose 5mo ago
Do you use anything to orcheatrate multiple agent pitted against each other (coder, reviewer, tester, etc)?
- magicalhippo 5mo ago
  Currently just manual. I'm not pushing the frontier here, just getting my feet wet. While both Claude Code and Codex are capable harnesses, I definitely think there's a lot more to be gained from the harnesses. Quite a few of the times I needed to nudge the steering wheel it was things that a separate agent with the right prompt could have picked up on.
variodot 5mo ago
[flagged]

nothinkjustai 5mo ago

None of it is non-trivial tho. You might think so, but it’s not.

magicalhippo 5mo ago
It wasn't trivial in that I used a lot of my programming and domain knowledge, both when iterating on the design document and skimming implementation plans. I didn't use it often, but when it was needed it was needed.

manmal 5mo ago

That’s not vibing, but waterfall development.

whatshisface 5mo ago
Waterfall was famous for wasting developer time and extending delivery dates in exchange for simplifying management. If Claude time is comparatively inexpensive, but human oversight remains necessary, we will switch back to waterfall because the relative importance of the two resources will invert.
magicalhippo 5mo ago
It's vibing in the sense that I'm not really writing code, and I'm leaving a lot of decision to the models. I let them drive a lot of the design document details, I just made sure it contained the salient points. Implementation plans I just skimmed. Didn't write any code, just did some checks here and there. But yes, I did think that it sorta felt like being a team lead for some eager programmers.

WesolyKubeczek 5mo ago

> Key has been to spend a fair amount of time on initial overall design document, which is split into tangible and limited phases. > For each phase an implementation plan is made. At the end, a summary document of what was delivered and what was discovered. > I do check the documents, and what they're doing. I also check the tests, some more thorough. Sounds like programming, but with extra steps.

dawnerd 5mo ago
Also the least fun part of development. Maybe I’m the weird one but I like to just jump right in, planning every last detail before writing code is boring.
- mrcsharp 5mo ago
  > planning every last detail before writing code is boring Not only that but you can't really plan everything. It is impossible. Without LLMs, with every line of code you are making a decision or discovering something new that must be dealt with or realizing how the current thing might impact something else and so on. There is no way for a programmer to consider all of these little things ahead of time and if an attempt is made, it will take as long as actually writing that code.
  - magicalhippo 5mo ago
    > Without LLMs, with every line of code you are making a decision or discovering something new that must be dealt with or realizing how the current thing might impact something else and so on. Part of this is true, part of it the agents catch at least a non-trivial portion of. If you prompt it to do a review, especially with a specific angle like ensuring sustained write performance, or how it will work when the future extensions are implemented, they do often catch a lot of issues. I agree you lose a fair bit of the sense of "it feels like I'm doing something wrong", or "this doesn't seem optimal" etc. I think the skill in using these tools is to determine when you need that control and where it doesn't really matter.
- magicalhippo 5mo ago

nopurpose 5mo ago

Do you use anything to orcheatrate multiple agent pitted against each other (coder, reviewer, tester, etc)?

magicalhippo 5mo ago
Currently just manual. I'm not pushing the frontier here, just getting my feet wet. While both Claude Code and Codex are capable harnesses, I definitely think there's a lot more to be gained from the harnesses. Quite a few of the times I needed to nudge the steering wheel it was things that a separate agent with the right prompt could have picked up on.

variodot 5mo ago

[flagged]