It’s about time these types of articles actually include the types of tasks being “orchestrated” (as the author writes) that aren’t just plain refactoring chores or React boilerplate. Sanity has quite a backlog of long-requested features and the message here is that these agents are supposedly parallelizing a lot of the work. What kind of staff engineer has “80% of their code” written by a “junior developer who doesn't learn“?

▲ mindwok 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

IMO “junior developer who doesn't learn“ is not quite right. Claude is more like an senior, highly academic engineer who has read all the literature but hasn't ever written any code. Amazing encyclopaedic knowledge, zero taste.

I've been building commercial codebases with Claude for the last few months and almost all of my input is on taste and what defines success. The code itself is basically disposable.

▲

all2 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> The code itself is basically disposable.

I'm finding this is the case for my work as well. The spec is the secret sauce, the code (and its many drafts) are disposable. Eventually I land on something serviceable, but until I do, I will easily drop a draft and start on a new one with a spec that is a little more refined.

▲

dotancohen 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I just like to add that the database design is the real secret sauce, important even more than external APIs in my opinion.

▲

all2 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This is something that I've stumbled into as well. DB models AND dataflow. Getting both of those well spec'd makes things a lot easier.

▲

mattmanser 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Well, not DB design really, you can achieve the same thing by defining your POCOs well. I switched entirely to code-first design years ago. If you haven't worked with a good ORM, you're really missing out, though I admit there was quite a bit of friction at first.

	▲	dotancohen 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		No, I really am talking about how the database is organised. Tables representing objects, normalisation, etc. Whether or not it is accessed through the application with an ORM.

▲

bjornsing 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

So how do you best store and iterate on the spec? One way I guess would be to work on a branch an modify Claude.md to reflect what the branch is for. Is that a good approach? Are there others?

▲

globular-toast 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If the code is disposable then where do all the rules and reasoning etc live apart from in your head?

▲

dotancohen 2 days ago | parent [-]

In the spec.

▲

globular-toast 2 days ago | parent [-]

Hmm... my code is the spec. It just happens to be executable. Is writing a precise spec in English easier than in a programming language?

▲

dotancohen 2 days ago | parent [-]

The spec contains ambiguities and the code contains bugs. Clarifying ambiguities in the spec with stakeholders, allows one to reduce bugs in the code.

▲

caseyohara 2 days ago | parent [-]

If you repeat this process until all ambiguities in the spec are eliminated, aren't you essentially left with code? Or at least something that looks more like code than plain English?

	▲	dotancohen 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		No

▲

baq 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The code itself is basically disposable.

This is key. We’re in mass production of software era. It’s easier and cheaper to replace a broken thing/part than to fix it, things being some units of code.

▲

sanitycheck 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Eh, Claude is like a magical spaniel that can read and write very quickly, with early-stage alzheimers, on amphetamines.

Yes it knows a lot and can regurgitate things and create plausible code (if I have it run builds and fix errors every time it changes a file - which of course eats tokens) but having absolutely no understanding of how time or space works leads to 90% of its great ideas being nonsensical for UI tasks. Everything is needing very careful guidance and supervision otherwise it decides to do something different instead. For back end stuff, maybe it's better.

I'm on the fence regarding overall utility but $20/month could almost be worth it for a tool that can add a ton of debug logging in seconds, some months.

▲ vincent_builds 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Hi Ale, author here. Skepticism is understandable, but trust me, I'm not just writing React boilerplate or refactoring.

I find it difficult to include examples because a lot of my work is boring backend work on existing closed-source applications. It's hard to share, but I'll give it a go with a few examples :)

----

First example: Our quota detection system (shipped last month) handles configurable threshold detection across billing metrics. The business logic is non-trivial, distinguishing counter vs gauge metrics, handling multiple consumers, and efficient SQL queries across time windows.

Claude's evolution: - First pass: Completely wrong approach (DB triggers) - Second pass: Right direction, wrong abstraction - Third pass: Working implementation, we could iterate on

---- Second example: Sentry monitoring wrapper for cron jobs, a reusable component to help us observe our cronjob usage

Claude's evolution: - First pass: Hard-coded the integration into each cron job, a maintainability nightmare. - Second pass: Using a wrapper, but the config is all wrong - Third pass: Again, OK implementation, we can iterate on it

----

The "80%" isn't about line count; it's about Claude handling the exploration space while I focus on architectural decisions. I still own every line that ships, but I'm reviewing and directing rather than typing.

This isn't writing boilerplate, it's core billing infrastructure. The difference is that Claude is treated like a very fast junior who needs clear boundaries rather than expecting senior-level architecture decisions.

▲ bsder 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We have all these superpowered AI vibe coders, and yet open source projects still have vast backlogs of open issues.

Things that make you go "Hmmmmmm."

	▲	baq 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You have to pay a recurring subscription to access the worthwhile tools in a meaningful capacity. This goes directly against why retail users of open source software, some of whom are also developers of it, actually use it - and you can tell a lot of developers do it because they find coding fun. It’s a very different discussion when you’re building a product to sell.
	▲	TiredOfLife 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The projects that have those backlogs dont allow ai made code

▲ bakugo 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Actually providing examples of real tasks given to the AI and the subsequent results would break the illusion and give people opportunities to question the hype. Can't have that.

We'll just keep getting submission after submission talking about how amazing Claude Code is with zero real world examples.

	▲	vincent_builds 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Author here. It's fair enough. I didn't give real-world examples; that's partially down to what I typically work on. I usually work in brownfield backend logic in closed-source applications that don't showcase well. Two recent production features: 1. Quota crossing detection system - Complex business logic for billing infrastructure - Detects when usage crosses configurable thresholds across multiple metric types - Time: 4 days parallel work vs ~10 days focused without AI `The 3-attempt pattern was clear here: - Attempt 1: DB trigger approach - wouldn't scale for our requirements - Attempt 2: SQL detection but wrong interfaces, misunderstood counter vs gauge metrics - Attempt 3: Correct abstraction after explaining how values are stored and consumed` 2. Sentry monitoring wrapper for cron jobs - Reusable component wrapping all cron jobs with monitoring - Time: 1 day parallel vs 2 days focused Nothing glamorous, but they are real-world examples of changes I've deployed to production quicker because of Claude.
	▲	johnfn 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Really, zero real world examples? What about this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44159166

▲ willtemperley 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes exactly. Show us the code and we can evaluate the advice. Otherwise it’s just an advertisement.

▲ dingnuts 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

the kind of engineer who has been Salesified to the point that they write such drivel as "these learnings" instead of "lessons" in an article that allegedly has a technical audience.

it's funny because as I have gotten better as a dev I've gone backwards through his progression. when I was less experienced I relied on Google; now, just read the docs

▲

juped 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah, the trusty manual becomes #1 at around the same time as one starts actually engineering. You've entered the target audience!

	▲	skydhash 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		These days, I often just go straight to the source (when available) to clear some confusion about the library/software behavior. It can be a quite nice 10 mn break.