3 ms·
> I'm not sure that Claude's "Realigned the shape of the load-bearing ownership gate to reduce the blast radius of the design contract; confirmed, not assumed"
by skissane 14d ago
> I'm not sure that Claude's "Realigned the shape of the load-bearing ownership gate to reduce the blast radius of the design contract; confirmed, not assumed" is more meaningful than "fix".
For PR/commit descriptions, I mainly use Claude Sonnet 4.5. It isn’t perfect, but it produces significantly less of this weird gibberish than 5.x models or even Opus 4.x do
I also use an iterative process in which it writes the description, I read it, and then either manually edit it or ask it to make changes
- my-next-account 14d agoI use Astra at Very High, and shit is still bad. It doesn't actually understand anything, so it often says things which are clearly not needed to be stated. Recently, I've learned that I have very high standards for these things. For example, "fixes" as a commit msg just is NOT acceptable and would never fly where I work.
- manmal 14d agoAstra is such a mixed bag. It makes some amazing reviews and sometimes architecture suggestions that I like. But it’s also lazy and will just make up things.
- senderista 13d agohence adversarial review
- manmal 13d agoI’m familiar with how those are used, but not sure what you mean in this context.
- adastra22 12d agoHave another model (or even another instance of the same model) review the output of the first. Models will hallucinate. They are also quite good at spotting hallucinations in other models' output (with some more hallucinations thrown in). With a threshold for confirmation, and a few iteration loops, you arrive at a fixed point where every claim is supported.
- rrr_oh_man 13d agoVery high does not improve the model, fyi.
- my-next-account 13d agoWat, what am I paying for then?
- mitxela 13d agoDario's yacht and FOMO.
- rrr_oh_man 13d agoArguably, your LLM provider might be paying you, in a sense
- adastra22 12d agoA few things, but generally more chain of thought before generating a response. So the model is tuned to think more. Given that what it outputs for this task is a summary of its thinking, tuning it to think more will just make a more verbose, less useful commit message. Tune your model parameters to what is right for the task, not the highest you can afford.
- jester997 13d agoHonestly you probably want a model that has only been trained on language and literature. Nothing from online discourse. And even then… writing is personal expression. Here people are talking about commit messages. That’s fine but AI doing writing for anyone and I WILL NOT READ IT unless it’s literally basic tech manual. We read to hear and engage with people’s thoughts. If someone outsources that to AI then they should be shunned.