webofbits

webofbits OP

Besides self-reviewing + addressing automated AI/other people comments, what is the other moment you suggest writing the code myself?

0
Post #11
mudasobwa

mudasobwa

Creator of Cure

I am not a big fan of giving bits of advise, even when solicited. Our mileage may vary.

Typically, when I figure out the task in my head, I instantly know, whether I would write the code myself, or delegate. Even more, I know what model am I to delegate.

1
Post #12
webofbits

webofbits OP

i take that

0
Post #13
mat-hek

mat-hek

Membrane Core Team

I recently started deliberately doing some small tasks myself, usually the ones that feel pleasant, no matter if I feel agent would figure it out. For me, it’s a very effective way to keep understanding the project, better than just reading the code. I don’t consider it a waste of time.

Also, when I feel like I’d rather do something myself than explain it to the agent, I do it myself but I intentionally miss things and than tell the agent to complete it. For example, I use some API that doesn’t exist and expect the agent to create it. Kind of ‘prompting by coding’.

Solving Leetcode when waiting for Claude is also an option :smiley:

3
Post #14
afuerstenau

afuerstenau

Good question. I learn elixir at the moment. I noticed that it’s hard for me to really learn a new language and to make progress on an app which is relevant to me. I thought it’s easier to learn something new when it’s more relevant for me and it was in the past but that changed. When it’s too relevant for me I want to have it faster so the urge to rely on AI is bigger.

So I don’t use the AI at all when I want to learn something.

1
Post #15
webofbits

webofbits OP

So I don’t use the AI at all when I want to learn something.

That’s a really good advice.

I found this article intriguing… Why you should still type code in 2026 - Doug Slater

0
Post #16
jam

jam

I tried Claude code for a while and didn’t write anything but recently unsubscribed. I’m taking a step back to reevaluate. It seems really easy for the code to get away from you if you’re not super diligent, ymmv. The code technically works but there’s a lot of slop and cleaning it up isn’t fun imo.

I think I’m looking for a tool that lets me cook and supercharges in other areas. IMO, there’s a product waiting to be discovered with this thesis. If you’ve come across anything, let me know. I’m going to try out zed’s delta.

Overall, I’m planning to move a bit slower and hand code more (maybe I’ll let them fill in some things like mat-hek mentioned). I think leveraging LLMs for adversarial reviews, documentation, and automated end-to-end testing could be more useful than having them generate the code so I can keep the understanding more easily instead of managing a black box.

2
Post #17
mudasobwa

mudasobwa

Creator of Cure

Funny enough, I would draw the When to use LLM picture absolutely differently.

I never allow an assistant to mess with the design. It can do what it was told to do, but choices, let alone the creative stuff. Nah.

I do design myself. Always. Very carefully. I do not talk to an assistant on this stage either. I do not need second-hand ideas, and LLM does not have original ones by design.

Tests is something I allow it to write, under my strong supervision. This and that must be property-based, that is unit, and this is integration, now you know the drill.

And the code?—100%, I will fix it if it did a spaghetti soup. Or rewrite completely, if I feel like it. Maybe super complex task, I would do it myself from scratch, just to save time.

1
Post #18
webofbits

webofbits OP

Interesting point of view. Most engineers eagerly rely on heavy models like Opus/Fable/etc to do the design for them.

For more complex tasks, I tend to heads down on diagraming first then have AI to review any gaps.

1
Post #19
cmo

cmo

I do a mix. For my main product I do most of it by hand or use AI to make small changes, but use AI for exploring potential ideas and building little things that are less important.

0
Post #20