[x-yl]

In my experience LLMs (I speak mainly of Claude Code & Cursor) write very poor quality Rust.

They treat it like it's JavaScript, falling back to using String/&str needlessly instead of making new types. They do ugly `static Mutex<Refcell<` a-la global JS variables for info sharing instead of working out the lifetimes to do it properly. It loves making functions infallible and then panic-ing within them and certainly I wouldn't use them for unsafe at all - they hallucinate safety comments which are in fact, totally unsound.

Of course these are all surmountable with an experienced developer to regularly step in and unfuck the code, but forcing them into 'harder' territory where every problem is not solved by a .clone() and an Arc<Mutex<>> means they will spend minutes 'thinking' about basic lifetime issues until I step in and add the missing `move` in a closure.

[chucky_z]

We’ve developed incredibly strict and comprehensive clippy rules and found that to drastically improve the quality of the code as the LLM now should pass all clippy checks. You can add a clippy skill as well to attempt to turn “should” into “must.”

[gritzko]

That is interesting. I make LLMs write C with the general hope that a simpler language they can manage well. That is not entirely true, though. They reason about C fluently indeed. The problem is, Claude pumps lots of bad C into the codebase if left unattended for 5 min. So, I need some clean-up passes afterwards to get to some acceptable quality level (both by LLMs and my own eyes). At which point, Claude sees the problem clearly, for some mysterious reason. Also, I use a C dialect heavly influenced by Go (slices, generics, no smart tricks, virtually no malloc).

[satvikpendem]

> general hope that a simpler language they can manage well

It's the opposite; a language with lots of guardrails allows the AI to write better code especially as it is able to use the compiler and linter to guide it through the process. It's why OpenAI for example was able to disprove some recent theorem recently, due to the LLM converting its thoughts into a formal language theorem prover to then check its work.

[bjoli]

> if left unattended for 5 min.

Is THAT how people use AI? I thought _I_ was vibe coding by telling it to write one function at a time and making sure I understand every line it outputs.

[ahknight]

"Vibe coding" is a term that means "Prompt the LLM with a request for a project and wait for it to finish". If you're reading and understanding anything it made, that's not vibe coding, that's agentic development.

[jorvi]

LLMs generally write poor quality anything. It'll [usually] work, but it'll need massive refactoring to get in a maintainable and efficient state.

[sgt]

I've actually found Opus 4.7 to write decent Django / Python code.

[ryan_n]

this was true a year ago but not so much anymore. You still have to supervise the agents, but they can write maintainable code if you keep an eye on it.

[apatheticonion]

You gotta know how to write Rust (and general software arch) first. LLMs + Rust have been great for me.

"Write an SQL Repository with this interface"

Sweet - no need for SQLc or an ORM

[adeptima]

same experience. any good claude skills to ease the pain?

[small_model]

Maybe true 6 months ago, but now it's better than any Rust Dev, as long as you guide it and not just let it rip on a full service/app unsupervised.

[runtime_terror]

It's better than any Rust dev... as long as you guide it

What?