Fair point - I should be more transparent. Yes, Claude assisted significantly with development. The .gitignore excludes AI config files because they where not needed in the project and aren't useful to others. I'll add a note to the README about AI-assisted development. The code is reviewed and understood, not blindly accepted.
Could you estimate how much was written by AI vs you? Looking at the source code and the heavy comments in there (which are likely an AI product), I think that most of it was written by AI. Same with the whole docs directory.
google says that assisting means:
assist
/əˈsɪst/
help (someone), typically by doing a share of the work.
So in this case... wouldn't the relationship be inverted, e.g. you assisting AI? (semi joking ;))
You're right to push on this, let me be fully transparent.
100% of the code was generated by AI (Claude Opus 4.5(I am super impressed by the capabilities of Opus 4.5), via Cursor with MCP tools). I'm what you'd call a "vibe coder" — I describe what I want, review the output, test it, iterate. I haven't written Rust by hand for this project.
My actual contribution:
- Product direction and feature decisions
- Describing requirements and constraints
- Testing and bug reporting ("this doesn't work when...")
- Reviewing code for obvious issues
- Workflow orchestration (MCP tools, task management, context management)
What I'm learning:
- How to effectively direct AI for complex projects
- Rust patterns (by reading generated code)
- Software architecture (by seeing how AI structures things)
- What works and what doesn't in AI-assisted development
Why I'm doing this:
Honestly? To learn and experiment. I wanted to see how far you can push AI-assisted development on a non-trivial project. Ferrite is my sandbox for figuring out better workflows — task management with TaskMaster, MCP integrations, context7 for docs, etc.
Is this "real" software development?
I don't know. It's definitely a new paradigm. The code compiles, runs, and does useful things. Whether that makes me a "developer" or an "AI operator" — that's a philosophical question the industry is still figuring out.
The documentation and comments being AI-heavy was a fair tell. I probably should have been upfront about this from the start.
It's vibe coded. The entire project is only 10 commits, a few of them are giant with a bunch of markdown files full of emojis in the docs/ folder.
Fair point - I should be more transparent. Yes, Claude assisted significantly with development. The .gitignore excludes AI config files because they where not needed in the project and aren't useful to others. I'll add a note to the README about AI-assisted development. The code is reviewed and understood, not blindly accepted.
Could you estimate how much was written by AI vs you? Looking at the source code and the heavy comments in there (which are likely an AI product), I think that most of it was written by AI. Same with the whole docs directory.
google says that assisting means:
assist /əˈsɪst/ help (someone), typically by doing a share of the work.
So in this case... wouldn't the relationship be inverted, e.g. you assisting AI? (semi joking ;))
You're right to push on this, let me be fully transparent.
100% of the code was generated by AI (Claude Opus 4.5(I am super impressed by the capabilities of Opus 4.5), via Cursor with MCP tools). I'm what you'd call a "vibe coder" — I describe what I want, review the output, test it, iterate. I haven't written Rust by hand for this project.
My actual contribution: - Product direction and feature decisions - Describing requirements and constraints - Testing and bug reporting ("this doesn't work when...") - Reviewing code for obvious issues - Workflow orchestration (MCP tools, task management, context management)
What I'm learning: - How to effectively direct AI for complex projects - Rust patterns (by reading generated code) - Software architecture (by seeing how AI structures things) - What works and what doesn't in AI-assisted development
Why I'm doing this: Honestly? To learn and experiment. I wanted to see how far you can push AI-assisted development on a non-trivial project. Ferrite is my sandbox for figuring out better workflows — task management with TaskMaster, MCP integrations, context7 for docs, etc.
Is this "real" software development? I don't know. It's definitely a new paradigm. The code compiles, runs, and does useful things. Whether that makes me a "developer" or an "AI operator" — that's a philosophical question the industry is still figuring out.
The documentation and comments being AI-heavy was a fair tell. I probably should have been upfront about this from the start.
5 replies →
Good catch. For me its a red flag when the dev does not disclose AI usage