Yes but my point was that they seem to explicitly not care about code quality and/or the insane amount of bloat, and seem to just want the LLM to be able to deal with it.

▲

lukaslalinsky 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I've heard somewhere that they have roughly 100% code churn every few months, so yes, they unfortunately don't care about code quality. It's a shame, because it's still the best coding agent, in my experience.

▲

menaerus 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> they unfortunately don't care about code quality.

> It's a shame, because it's still the best coding agent, in my experience.

If it is the best, and if it delivers the value users are asking for, then why would they have an incentive to make further $$$ investments to make it of a "higher" quality if the value this difference could make is not substantial or hurts the ROI?

On many projects I found this "higher quality" not only to be false of delivering more substantial value but actually I found it was hurting the project to deliver the value that matters.

Maybe we are after all entering the era of SWE where all this bike-shedding is gone and only type of engineers who will be able to survive in it will be the ones who are capable of delivering the actual value (IME very few per project).

▲

troupo 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Is this why they ran into a bug with people hitting usage limits even on very short sessions and had to cease all communications for over a day after a week of gaslighting users because they couldn't find the root cause in the "quality doesn't matter" code base?

Or that's why tgey had to buy bun with actual engineers to work on Claude Code to reduce memory peaks from 68 GB (yes, 68 gigabytes) to a "measely" 1.7? Because code quality doesn't matter?

Or that a year later they still cannot figure out how to render anything in the terminal without flickering?

The only reason people use Claude Code is because it's the only way to use Anthropic's heavily subsidized subscription. You get banned if you use it through other, better, tools.

▲

menaerus an hour ago | parent [-]

Sure, now the only thing remaining is you convincing Anthropic that they're doing wrong. Or alternatively you change your perspective.

	▲	troupo an hour ago \| parent [-]
		"Windows is the world's most popular desktop consumer OS. Microsoft are doing everything right, and should never ever change. Who are we to criticise them" Meanwhile I apparently need to change my persoective about this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47598488

▲

stingraycharles 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, but as I said, it’s in a way the ultimate form of dogfooding: ideally they’ll be able to get the LLM smart enough to keep the codebase working well long-term.

Now whether that’s actually possible is a second topic.

▲

drakezone 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]