[pseudony]

I wonder how. Everything I let claude code majorly write, whether Go, F#, C or Python, I end up eventually at a point where I systematically rip it apart and start writing it over.

In my study days, we talked of “spikes”. Software or components which functionally addressed some need, but often was badly written and architected.

That’s what I think most resembles claude code output.

And I ask the llm to write todo-lists, break tasks into phases, maintain both larger docs on individual features and a highly condensed overview doc. I also have written claude code like tools myself, run local LLMs and so on. That is to say, I may still be “doing it wrong”, but I’m not entirely clueless .

The only place where claude code has nearly done the whole thing and largely left me with workable code was some react front-end work I did (and no, it wasn’t great either, just fair enough).

[MrSkelter]

As someone who knows how to code and who employs a number of coders I am not sure choosing to do it yourself means the underlying code is unworkable.

In two decades I have never met an engineer who joined a project and didn’t at some point suggest starting over.

The world runs on buggy, hack filled, good enough code. The idea LLMs are failing when that’s what they produce is wrong in my opinion.

[dave1999x]

Have you tried with Opus 4.5. It's a step change IMO.

[flashgordon]

There are different degrees of "ai wrote all my code". A very crappy way of doing it is to keep on one shotting it expecting it to "fall on the right solution" - very much infinite monkeys, infinite typewriters scenario.

The other way is to spend a fair bit of time building out a design and ask it to implement it while verifying what it is producing then and there instead of reviewing reams of slop later on. AI still produced 100% - just that it is not as glamorous or as marketing friendly of a sound bite. After all which product manager wants to understand refactoring or TDD or SOLID or design principles etc?

[aurareturn]

Because companies/users don’t pay for “great code”. They pay for results.

Does it work? How fast can we get it? How much does it cost to use it?

[janice1999]

> Because companies/users don’t pay for “great code”

Unless you work in an industry with standards, like medical or automotive. Setting ISO compliance aside, you could also work for a company which values long term maintainability, uptime etc. I'm glad I do. Not everyone is stuck writing disposable web apps.

[ekjhgkejhgk]

Or space, or defense, or some corners of finance and insurance.

> Not everyone is stuck writing disposable web apps.

Exactly. What I've noticed is that the a lot of the conversations on HNs is web devs talking to engineers and one side understands boths sides, and other one doesn't.

[aurareturn]

"Does it work?" covers what you said.

[castis]

Sounds like the best way to sell an OK product.

[bradleykingz]

yes, but to achieve those, one often needs great code

[aurareturn]

LLM use does not equal bad code.