[some-guy]

I'm currently in repos where the context window required is so large that the output is almost always "wrong" for the problem at hand. Quite a few people at my company burn through tokens this way, and it certainly isn't providing value to the company.

[AlotOfReading]

As always, improving accessibility for humans makes automation more effective. If the humans need to remember a PhD's worth of source code/documentation to contribute effectively, your codebase stinks.

[ivirshup]

People at my company have started writing docs specifically for claude. They're quite useful for me too, but kinda disappointing they never wrote these docs for their colleagues.

[staplers]

As someone who has written many docs, it's because 99% won't read it (rightfully so if it's verbose). You can turn that doc into a skill in a repo and Claude will read it everytime it's needed.

[dunham]

I recently saw this with the logseq api - the published api was an auto-generated stub. So I tried to grep the source code for the function and found detailed documentation written for claude. So I guess one benefit of all of this is that it's making people actually document things and maybe plan a little bit before implementing.

[bonesss]

I agree, in the general context of how I code.

The LLM hype train has me reflecting on what a spoiled existence working in a ‘proper’ language provides though…

React devs, JS devs, front-end devs working on large sites and frameworks might be triggering tens of files to be brought into context. What an OCaml dev can bring in through a 5 line union type can look very different in less token-efficient and terse languages.