To me, that's the most important consideration here. Are you targeting professional devs who are enhancing their current workflows iteratively with these improvements? Or re-thinking from the ground up, obfuscating most of what we've learned to date?
Maybe we need to trudge through all of these weeds until software creation hits its final, elegant form where "Anyone Can Code".
Maybe the old Gusteau quote is actually fitting here:
"You must be imaginative, strong-hearted. You must try things that may not work, and you must not let anyone define your limits because of where you come from. Your only limit is your soul. What I say is true - anyone can ̶c̶o̶o̶k̶ code... but only the fearless can be great."
Simplifying to the point a grandma could make an app isn't gonna make any grandma WANT to make apps. And that's fine, there's no issue, we don't have to make more people code and those who want, will, even if all we had was assembly and a light board...
Which I think is the spirit of your quote basically.
I do agree with your second paragraph and it’s more that you DON’T want to cook versus you being unable to cook.
- use the hoogle cli to search for the right types and functions
- include a comprehensive test suite
- run a build after every code change
- run tests after every successful build
GHC + a Claude-based agent is a thing to behold.
I've met so many engineers who have said exactly this. There are clearly some group of people obsessed with Cursor, but it's interesting to me how alien they seem to the majority of people using ai codegen right now.
"code" used to fire VS Code.
My rationale is: what else do they think they can get away with in my system?
VS Code Copilot Chat with #codebase in prompt has the edit mode which behaves similar to Cursor. Even more so with o1-preview selected.
Our first had a nice discussion on HN: https://blog.val.town/blog/codegen/
The other posts in the series:
I think it is the short, punchy sections with plenty of visuals and the fact that you are telling a story the whole way through, which has a natural flow, each experiment you describe, leading to the next.
Worth checking out their Cerebras-powered demo too - LLMs at 2000 tokens/second make applying proposed changes absurdly interactive: https://cerebrascoder.com/
I didn't care that much for cursor when I was just using Chat but once I switched to Composer I was very happy, and my experience is in total disagreement that it's not so good for smaller projects.
They also must have a good prompt for diff-based completions, I don't know how hard it is to extract that.
Yes, I wonder if reilly3000 will swing by with a leaked system prompt from them too
I don't see this complained about nearly as much as I'd expect. Groq has been out for over a year, I'm surprised OpenAI not acquired them and figured out how to 10x to 20x their speed on gpt4.
People are very happy to sit there for minutes if the correctness is high and the quality is high. It's still 100x or 1000x faster than finding 3rd party developers to work for you.
I wish the models were getting better but recently they've felt very stuck and this is it, so agent architectures will be the answer in the short term. That's what's working for us at srcbook rn.
Though I'm really eager to get back to it. When using Windsurf last week, I was impressed by their diffs on Sonnet. Seems like they work well. I would love to view their system prompt!
I hope that when we have time to resume work on this (maybe in Feb) that we'll be able to get it done. But then again, maybe just patience (and more fast-following) is the right strategy, given how fast things are moving...
I have started using AI coding assistant and I am not looking back.
This comes from an engineer that KEEP telling the junior on his team to NOT use GenAI.
The reality is that those tools are POWER TOOLS best used by engineers very well versed in the domain and in coding itself.
For them, it is really a huge time saving. The work is more like approving PR for a quite competent engineer than writing the PR myself.
My tool of choice is Cline, that is great, but not perfect.
And the quality is 100% correlated to:
1. The model
2. The context window
3. How well I prompt it.
In reverse order of importance.
Even an ok model, well prompted gives you a satisfactory code.
I'm starting to get a feeling of dread that our entire engineering organization is digging itself into a hole with lots of buggy code being written which no one seems to understand, presumably written with heavy LLM assistance. Our team seems to be failing to deliver more, and quality has seemingly worsened, despite leaning in to these tools.
Reading hacker news gives me the idea that LLMs are a miracle panacea, a true silver bullet. I think that the positive stories I hear on hacker news goes through a big selection bias. It has always been the motivated people who always utilized their tools to their best ability.
I definitely don't consider myself to be good in this regard either and struggle to use LLM tools effectively. Most of the time I would be happy with myself if I could just have a solid mental understanding of what the codebase is doing, never mind be a 10x AI enhanced developer.
It’s absolutely true that we are in a race for online editors, I feel fatigued competing for ai features instead of building core product features, but since my framework is new, it’s not known by any major LLM providers, so our users can’t get ai assistance unless we build something ourselves.
@stevekrouse huge shout out for your team’s open source work, hoping to help contribute upstream at some point!!
We've had some success[1] with the screenshot to actions - using Gemini/Molmo and ADB on phones. And human like decisions was made by GPT 4o. It also recalibrates itself and says "oh we are still at the home screen, let's find the gmail app first"
1. https://github.com/BandarLabs/clickclickclick - Letting AI control/use my phone.
Coupled with the fact that devs prefer open source tools and are capable of (and often prefer) making their own tooling, it never seemed like a great market to go after. I also encountered a lot of hostility trying to share yet another AI developer tool.
(Note I am one of those developers who prefer open source tools — which should’ve been a hint…)
1. use a temp file as a reference for the entire refactor
2. make it plan the entire thing, tell it to use a high level and low level checklists, tell it to take notes for itself, and tell it to use the temp file as a scratchpad for taking notes and storing code blocks.
3. tell it to do small incremental changes, and do bottoms up approach.
Since that's already a huge speed up, I'm sure many of these agents can do the same.
The pie for whom? For drug dealers who give power users their LLM fix so they feel smart and can fake it?
The pie is certainly shrinking for software engineers, as evidenced by the layoffs. Cocky startup founders may be next.