[jrmg]

It’s not just new frameworks, it’s new features. Good luck getting a LLM to write code that uses iOS 26 features, for example.

I’m not convinced simply getting the LLM to inject documentation about the features will work well (perhaps someone has studied this?) because the reason they’re good at doing ‘well known’ things is the plethora of actual examples they’re trained on.

[lamuswawir]

I now put documentation of my DSLs and macros in a folder in the repo. I give the agent an instruction about consulting the documentation and it is working so far, but not that well. I am considering switching to all generics.

[ewoodrich]

I have been dealing with an extremely frustrating issue after moving from a very popular but now deprecated package to its supported successor. The API looks deceptively similar in terms of method names which is causing endless grief for LLM pattern matching. Even when I provide the exact documentation needed for the new API the massive amount of training material scattered across the internet for the old package version dominates and has zero effect even after one reply into the conversation.

I've tried Gemini 2.5 Pro, o3 and Claude 4 and they have their own unique tone of confidently wrong, deception about reasoning and gaslighting but produce the same result. I wasted way too much time trying to figure out a zero shot prompting strategy before I just rewrote the whole thing by hand.