| ▲ | bicx 4 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
My team is in the agentic orchestrator phase. I like this software factory pattern in concept, but our biggest challenges in development are acceptance testing of anything UI-related. Mobile app testing in particular is still a huge bottleneck that requires a human. AI models really suck at identifying poor usability and jank, particularly because they only typically process snapshots of the app from an instance in time. I know there are traditional testing frameworks that can detect jitter and frame drop to a certain level. We could potentially start having agents build that in. If we had concrete designs and specs on every project, that would also be helpful, but in a fast-moving startup, that gets delegated to the builders. That puts a human back in the loop every time. Curious to hear what anyone else does to fully adopt a software factory pattern. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | 10 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
| [deleted] | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | sroerick 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I totally agree with this. Agents seem tremendously bad at UI to me. Maybe it's just because I am a back end guy. Right now I'm working on a declarative UI framework which can help me along here. My thought is that if I sacrifice a little control for sane primitives, that will make that spec /build loop easier. I think ClayUI is a really interesting "reduced instruction set" for UI. I don't know that immediate mode UI is the right call for anything web related (that's how you get React lol) but his reduced primitive layer is very interesting to me | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | nkrisc 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
If your UI is created for humans to use, you should still have humans involved in testing it. | |||||||||||||||||