AmiteK

6 ms·

1.
by AmiteK 6mo ago
GitHub: https://github.com/LogicStamp/logicstamp-context It compiles TypeScript codebases into deterministic, structured context. Happy to answer questions.
2.
Show HN: LogicStamp – A Context Compiler for TypeScript(logicstamp.dev)
3 points by AmiteK 6mo ago|2 comments
3.
Show HN: Detect Drift in TypeScript codebases(github.com)
1 points by AmiteK 7mo ago|0 comments
4.
Show HN: Catching breaking interface changes in TypeScript refactors (AST-based)(github.com)
2 points by AmiteK 7mo ago|0 comments
5.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
I agree - that’s on me for the wording. I’m not claiming repeatability of agent inference or LLM sessions. By “repeatability” I mean the extraction itself: given the same repo state + config, the derived semantic artifact is identical every
6.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
I think the disagreement is about where inference belongs, not whether LLMs are capable. Git diffs + LLM inference work well for understanding changes once. What I’m targeting is reducing the need to re-infer semantic surface changes every
7.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
That’s a reasonable hypothesis, and I agree LLMs are very good at inferring structure from raw TypeScript within a local reasoning window. However, that inference has to be repeated as context shifts or resets. The claim I’m making is narro
8.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
I think we’re optimizing for different constraints. If your goal is zero extra round trips and you’re happy with AGENTS.md auto-injection + LSP queries, then I agree LogicStamp won’t be a win on token cost for that setup. The AGENTS.md comp
9.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
On tool-call overhead: in the MCP flow it’s typically 1–2 calls per task (watch_status once, then read_bundle for the relevant slice). In watch mode we also skip snapshot refresh entirely. Token-wise, the intent isn’t “dump everything”. it’
10.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
I think there’s a conflation here between artifact determinism and agent behavior. LogicStamp’s determinism claim is about the generated context: same repo state + config ⇒ identical bundles. That property holds regardless of how or when an
11.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
That’s fair, and I agree LSP-style search is excellent for interactive, local exploration. LogicStamp isn’t trying to replace that. The problem it targets is different: producing stable, explicit structure (public APIs, components, routes)
12.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
Yes. In the MCP setup the agent doesn’t decide to regenerate arbitrarily. When stamp context --watch is active, the MCP server detects it. The agent first calls logicstamp_watch_status to see whether context is being kept fresh. If watch mo
13.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
Adding a bit more context since I didn’t see your expanded comment at first: AGENTS.md and LogicStamp aren’t mutually exclusive. AGENTS.md is great for manual, human-curated guidance. LogicStamp focuses on generated ground-truth contracts d
14.
by AmiteK 8mo ago
Good question. LogicStamp treats context as deterministic output derived from the codebase, not a mutable agent-side model. When code changes mid-session, watch mode regenerates the affected bundles, and the agent consumes the latest output
15.
Show HN: Deterministic, machine-readable context for TypeScript codebases(github.com)
2 points by AmiteK 8mo ago|21 comments
16.
Show HN: A CLI That Compiles React, Next.js, TS and Vue for LLMs(github.com)
2 points by AmiteK 9mo ago|0 comments
17.
by AmiteK 9mo ago
I think this distinction matters less to users than to builders. From a user perspective, what’s novel here is policy and intent (no ads, no AI, privacy-first), not whether the index is first-party yet. Many projects start as thin layers ov
18.
by AmiteK 9mo ago
One thing that seems under-discussed is what kind of state is worth persisting. Raw chat logs are cheap; distilled decisions, constraints, and preferences are harder but much more valuable. Even if most approaches fail, exploring that bound