HN user
14bijenwas.kweeperen@icloud.com
These routers can be interesting on a company level to optimize for cost and quality, but for individuals who mostly work on the same tasks, i doubt it. You want to leverage the cache and switching models within a task seems not cost effective to me.
My son setup a minecraft server on a mac mini using claude, was pretty smooth. If your kids just use it in house you do no need to worry about security issues. In my case I did create a dedicated user account for the server.
Lots of unit test do not add value in the traditional sense, but they do help the llm to understand the code.
Same for me, that is why I switched to Pi. I still use Sonnet or Opus, but mainly GPT due to cost.
Pi is meant for people who know what they are doing. If you dont fall into that category use OpenCode, etc. The whole idea is that you customize Pi to your own needs by asking it to modify itself through extensions.
That said, sometimes it is really easy to leverage existing extensions. You run the risk of supply chain attack though. I installed one extension that was useful, modified it to my needs and pinned it.
+1
the distinction between personal projects and Enterprise development is a big one. A severe bug in my personal projects, i fix it on the fly. A bug in our products rolled out, nightmare.
404, typescript deployment?
The thing I do not get with these routers is that you will have more cache misses (5min ttl). And if there is one thing i’ve learned; using the cache is crucial.
How does this router translate to $$$ when developing?
Built my own using Claude Code; inside a gitlab job we call Claude Code headless. This works well. There is a tiny mcp server exposed to Claude so it can post inline comments. All existing comments are fed into the reviewer to avoid double posting. The quality of feedback is high. Most complexity is in the SHA management. For example after a rebase. Luckily LLMs understand git very well otherwise it would have been impossible for me.
“People dramatically underestimate what thousands of organized humans can accomplish when they are adequately fed, aggressively supervised, and denied alternative career paths.“
For those who also get fed up by the ever growing (unstable) coding agents, check out Pi. It is not for everyone but for the diehards it is good.
I just dont get why people choose Python and not e.g. Go for high performance problems.
I m running into similar issues, more and more i’m removing complexity from the agent to the (Go) logic in order to make it more deterministic.
To be more precise; everything is prepared in the form of files instead of letting the subagents making api/cli calls. And still - sometimes (even with enough context) the main agent takes strange turns.
“We collect the native tool calls and bash commands”
Holy shit, I cant imagine this to hold for every bash command Claude Code executes. That would be terrible, probably violating GDPR. (The cmd could contain email address etc)
I must be wrong.
You can ask it to /simplify
Related, it seems to me that there are two types of tests, the ones created in a TDD style and can be modified and the ones that come from acceptance criteria and should only be changed very carefully.
Start over, create a new plan with the lessons learned.
You need to converge on the requirements.
Try the latest skill-creator, has a/b testing
“ MCP support. Axe can connect any MCP server to your agents”
I just don't see this in the readme… It is not in the Features section at least.
Anyway, i have MCP server that can post inline comments into Gitlab MR. Would like to try to hook it up to the code reviewer.
No worries. True, you need to learn new skills to work properly with Claude. However, 30 yrs of coding experience come in handy to quickly detect it is going in the wrong direction. Especially on an architectural level you need to guide it.
Embrace
I don’t think this an AI specific problem, same can happen with humans.
I build a code reviewer based on the claude code sdk that integrates with gitlab, pretty straightforward. The hard work is in the integration, not the review itself. That is taken care of with SDK.
Devs, even conservative ones, like it. I’ve built a lot of tooling in my life, but i never had the experience that devs reach out to me that fast because it is ‘broken’. (Expired token or a bug for huge MRs)
OR - OR? And - And
Exoskeleton AND autonomous agent, where the shift is moving to autonomous gradually.
Exactly, one out of four or three prompts require tuning, nudging or just stopping it. However it takes seniority to see where it goes astray. I suspect that lots of folks dont even notice that CC is off. It works, it passes the tests, so it is good.
Our product is so good, the users are willing to put up with a bug once and there.
We need to get marketshare by going fast!
It is frustrating how often things break in CC. Luckily issues are quickly fixed, but it worries me that the QA / automated testing is brittle. Hope they get out of this start-up mode and deliver Enterprise grade software.
That will make 300
This thread is working pretty decently. No bots so far
I have 40 years of programming experience, started with assembler, nowadays mainly Go, K8s and the whole enterprise shebang. I’m a big fan and supporter of TDD and XP.
Claude Code will change your life when you learn how to program with it. However, if you are a programmer with not a lot of desire for automated tests and specs/designs, you are probably not going to be successful with it.
The art of coding has become a commodity. Validation and verification are the new art.
Internal Server Error
The comments are what makes the model understand your code much better.
See it as a human, the comments are there to speed up understanding of the code.