I'm surprised that you're getting so many replies saying it's the same. So far in my usage today Opus 5.5 does seem like a noticeably better writer. Opus 5 frequently made me want to strangle it while 5.5 has been producing a lot less incomprehensible gobbledygook.

▲

MattyRad a day ago | parent | next [-]

I know we're all experiencing NDFSMs differently, like that's part of the whole problem, but 5.5 just gave me "The truncating quantizer collides two oranges", which is a new low for me.

▲

kyleee a day ago | parent [-]

Was it a true statement though? You may need to explain what you were working on (heh)

▲

MattyRad a day ago | parent | next [-]

Like the sibling comment says, text is always "true" in the sense that it's reacting to context correctly. So yes, true, but insufferable.

Ironically, what I'm working on a post-processing hook for colorizing and summarizing responses without degrading the session quality. So "truncating" = summarizing, "quantizer" = char limits and thresholds, "collides" = conflicts, "two oranges" is referring to the "alert level colors" where a second model (Haiku/Sonnet) colorizes text based on the perceived (or suggested) priority of a response's statements (e.g. "just so you're aware, I didn't commit" is fucking useless and it needs to be blacked out).

So the original insufferable statement translates to something like "The code that checks whether a text fragment is too verbose was conflicting with the part that colorizes the text."

P.S. Let me know if there's something out there that exists like this- something that adds a dimension like color or priority-assessments on a per-response basis. So far all I've seen is 2 dozen ~100k starred GitHub plugins that add zero value or make things worse.

	▲	dev-complete 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yep, sounds like the Opus I despise and the reason I dropped Claude Code. It reads like it doesn't want to be understood.

▲

colordrops a day ago | parent | prev [-]

These claudisms are usually "true" but they are so heavily load-bearing that you need a claude-to-english dictionary to understand it.

▲

pixelready a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah I’m having a much better time reading Opus 5.5 output today vs. 5’s wall of nonsense. You still get a few telltale turn of phrases, though the load-bearing smoking guns haven’t turned up yet. It’s still a bit verbose compared to what I’d ideally like, but it’s tolerable now.

Code-wise it seems to still nitpick, especially in reviews, but it doesn’t seem to rabbit hole quite as badly on tangents and scope-creep. These are just first impressions though. It’ll take a few weeks of regular use to really have a sense of it.