[prettyblocks]

I'm curious. What have you actually tried? Are you just prompting the LLM with one off tasks? For good results, you need to take the time to read the documentation for the harness you are using and configure your environment. This tuning can take dozens hours to nail down. Then there's the actual approach for working on your projects. Many people that have good results with agentic coding actually spend the bulk of their time in plan mode where they go back and forth with the LLM designing a granular playbook for the task at hand before they ever have it write any code.

[hollowturtle]

I'm curious. What makes you think that me sharing an example(which one of the many?) of what I actually tried would somehow add something to the conversation? What's the usefulness of just an anecdotal example?

As I said we have a plenty of different envs, codebases, requirements. Things are complex.

You're posing it like I tried just one time. It's been hundreds of hours of tries and I just found out what works best for me, like everyone should do. My original post above isn't that hard to understand.

Let me stress this out again:

> That's why the debate is so polizered imo, there isn't a shared experience

[prettyblocks]

In my experience most people with the type of critique I'm seeing from you have only tried it one time or have not taken the time to invest in an environment/process that will work for agentic coding.

My question is not so much about sharing a cherry picked example, but the question was more like "have you tried in earnest to make it work". That's the part that wasn't clear from your original post. But you say you have, and you weren't impressed. Fair enough. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise, but I encourage people to give the tools a fair chance before throwing up their hands and deciding it's meh.

Having said all that, you're right there isn't a shared experience.