Remix.run Logo
acedTrex 2 hours ago

Claude attempted a treesitter to go port

Better title

gritzko 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I work on a revision control system project, except merge is CRDT. On Feb 22 there was a server break-in (I did not keep unencrypted sources on the client, server login was YubiKey only, but that is not 100% guarantee). I reported break-in to my Telegram channel that day.

My design docs https://replicated.wiki/blog/partII.html

I used tree-sitter for coarse AST. Some key parts were missing from the server as well, because I expected problems (had lots of adventures in East Asia, evil maids, various other incidents on a regular basis).

When I saw "tree-sitter in go" title, I was very glad at first. Solves some problems for me. Then I saw the full picture.

ctmnt an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Wait, are you suggesting that OP broke in to your server and stole code and is republishing it as these repos?

I have questions. Have you reviewed the code here to see if it matches? What, more specifically, do you mean when you say someone broke in? What makes you think that this idea (which is nice but not novel) is worth stealing? If that sounds snarky, it’s not meant to; just trying to understand what’s going on. Why is that more likely than someone using Claude to vibe up some software along the same lines?

gritzko 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

1. Just saying, strange coincidence

2. How can we compare Claude's output in a different language?

3. Detecting break-ins and handling evil-maids: unless the trick is already known on the internets, I do not disclose. Odds are not in my favor.

4. Maybe worth, maybe not. I have my adaptations. Trying to make it not worthy of stealing, in fact.

ctmnt an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Also, evil maids, what?

atonse 23 minutes ago | parent [-]

I can't speak for the specificity of parent's "evil maids" phrase but the concept of an "Evil maid" is used in security scenarios.

A maid tends to be an example of a person who's mostly a stranger, but is given unmonitored access to your most private spaces for prolonged periods of time. So they theoretically become a good vector for a malicious actor to say "hey I'll give you $$ if you just plug in this USB drive in his bedroom laptop next time you're cleaning his house" - it's often used in the scenario of "ok what if someone has physical access to your resource for a prolonged period of time without you noticing? what are your protections there?"

I wonder if that's what OP meant? :-)

gritzko 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Evil maids (example): I put my laptop into a safe, seal the safe, seal the room, go to breakfast. On return, I see there was cleaning (not the usual time, I know the hotel), the cleaner looks strangely confused, the seal on the safe is detached (that is often done by applying ice; adhesive hardens, seal goes off). This level of paranoia was not my norm. Had to learn these tricks cause problems happened (repeatedly). In fact, I frequented that hotel, knew customs and the staff, so noticed irregularities.

gritzko 18 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

If you are wondering why my life is that difficult, am I a spy or a scizo. My birthday is 5 Apr, same as Satoshi, I work on decentralized systems since mid 2000s.

thebackup 22 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This was my first thought as well, just from reading the title.

red_hare 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How is OP using Claude relevant?

gritzko an hour ago | parent | next [-]

OK for prototyping. Not OK for prod use if noone actually read it line by line.

odvcencio an hour ago | parent | next [-]

ii am trying to not take issue with this comment because im aware of the huge stigma around ai generated code.

i needed this project so i made it for my use case and had to build on top of it. the only way to ensure quality is to read it all line by line.

if you give me code that you yourself have not reviewed i will not review it for you.

znpy an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That ship has sailed, man…

overfeed 41 minutes ago | parent [-]

No it has not - if it had, there'd be no need to shout down folk who disagree.

Not everyone buys into the inevitabilism. Why should I read code "author" didn't bother to write?

atonse 20 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Sorry but these are just not accurate as blanket statements anymore, given how good the models have gotten.

As other similar projects have pointed out, if you have a good test suite and a way for the model to validate its correctness, you can get very good results. And you can continue to iterate, optimize, code review, etc.

ks2048 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People should say what models/tools they used in even show the prompts.

up2isomorphism 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because OP obviously downplayed this important fact, which typically shows lower quality/less tested code.

DeepYogurt 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

maintenance burden

IshKebab an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

AI often produces nonsense that a human wouldn't. If a project was written using AI the chances that it is a useless mess are significantly higher than if it was written by a human.

odvcencio 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

well how did it do?

ctmnt an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Hard to say. Claude’s very good at writing READMEs. In fact, Copilot often complains about docs that sound like they’re about current capabilities when in fact they’re future plans or just plan aspirational.

Without downloading and testing out your software, how can we know if it’s any good? Why would we do that if it’s obviously vibed? The dilemma.

I’m not at all against vibe coding. I’m just pointing out that having a nice README is trivial. And the burden of proof is on you.

wocram 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Shouldn't you be able to answer that?

odvcencio an hour ago | parent [-]

yes and if you clicked the links you would know that i did answer it in the readme.

mathfailure an hour ago | parent | next [-]

But how do we know the readme isn't also vibecoded?

do_not_redeem an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Pure-Go tree-sitter runtime — no CGo, no C toolchain, WASM-ready.

No you didn't. The readme is obvious LLM slop. Em-dash, rule of three, "not x, y". Why should anyone spend effort reading something you couldn't be bothered to write? Why did you post it to HN from a burner account?