← Back to context

Comment by siscia

4 hours ago

Thanks so much for saying this!

Even with a single instance of Claude Code, running I am producing so much code that it is impossible to even self-review.

Can we please focus on that?

Self-review is an anti-pattern.

  • Just to be clear, when I say that it is impossible even to self review, it was an indication of how difficult is to review code of colleagues.

  • So much this. We don't review the assembly/machine-code that the compiler creates, why do we still review the code the AI generates?

    If it works as desired then ship it; if it doesn't then iterate until it does.

    • _because compiling a code language into machine language is deterministic_.

      If you think that compiling and explaining in English something to an LLM so it outputs code is the same activity, I just hope to never have you as a coworker.

      1 reply →

    • This is only OK where “it works” is the only criteria for accepting a software change.

    • Because the compiler does a deterministic transform on the input. And the input is less ambiguous than natural language and following more strict rules.

      Why ask obvious things?

I built some tools that lets me view diffs and summon agents to execute changes. You can probably vibe code that in a few minutes.

We simply need neural implant technology to overclock our brains, making the world (and its Claude instances) appear to go slower.

  • You got downvoted but your joke made me think of the show The Dark Matter and how they had the concept of a hallway with infinite doors to represent the multiverse to the human brain that cannot comprehend the state of superposition.

    I sort of get what you're going for maybe? In a sense these things are gonna evolve at a rate where we are not going to be able to operate at their plane and we will need a sort of UX translation