Hacker News Reader

Comment by teliskr | Hacker News Reader

I am getting really good results from claude. We have a 22-year old legacy system. The system is stable, but had issues as all legacy systems do. Claude has been great for modernizing the codebase, updating dependencies, auditing security, and rapidly adding new features. It has worked well with existing code style and patterns. Sometimes it is a little off-track, but overall it is pretty amazing.

When implementing new features or making large refactoring changes; I use the superpowers:brainstorming skill. That has consistent process which has worked really well. I alway review the code before merging, but most of the time there are few issues to correct.

I don't do 95% coverage, but I have increased it from 65% to about +80% and that is sufficient.

View on HN

My experience as well, working on very large-scale C++ code.

Thanks for adding such a thoughtful and level-headed comment to the discussion.

>most of the time there are few issues to correct.

Kindly share the metrics by which you evaluate the changes.

I don't require metrics in these instances. I review the code and test the functionality. That is sufficient for my needs.

> I review the code...

If this is true, then you are not saving a lot of time. Because most of the time is spent evaluating various options and ways to implement the functionality. Even when you are reviewing, you ll have to do that. (With LLMs, this is even more feasible, because now you can actually implement some of the variants, and evaluate them).

But on the other side, you are saving from typing the code. So if you are really reviewing everything, then you are not saving much time. The alternative is that you settle for some local maximum during each review, that in long term won't necessarly translate to a globlal maximum or even a global "good enough" position...

I'm saving time. It's implementing features in a few hours that would have taken me weeks to implement. I can review code much faster than I can create well reasoned, implemented and tested solutions.

Can you tell me what the most complex thing (software) that you have yourself implemented is?

This faux socratic method flavor of AI skepticism is so cringe at this point, and reeks of your own insecurity in your beliefs. We get it, you don't think AI is useful for the type of coding people claim it is. Why on earth would anyone try and convince you at this point?

>AI is useful

This is not a binary thing. It could be useful at the same time detrimental in some manner. Look at smartphones. I am just raising the possibilities if one use LLMs indiscriminately to generate code.

No, that would be more honest. Instead you’re asking loaded questions as if anyone owes you an explanation or proof.

Don't answer then...its as simple as that...

They can LLM themselves to complete lock in for all I care...

lol, yeah, you clearly don’t care at all

I care about other things. Like my amusement that I get when I see the AI praising accounts go silent once they are pushed a bit...

Probably because it's utterly pointless to try and convince someone in 2026 that LLMs are useful for coding. Why waste time trying to talk to someone with their head in the sand?

>LLMs are useful for coding..

No one said they are not...look at my comment above in this thread!

Why are you so mad lol...

lol, why are you still here trolling?

Calm down..I don't want to ruin your day or something..

Lately, I've seen a couple responses to my comments which inquire about metrics. They seem strange and I wonder if they are bots. I just noticed this inquiry is from an account that is 11 days old. How does one benefit by adding bot comments in a forum like this?

take a look at my comments and tell me if you feel like I am a bot...

If you could stop creating new accounts, that would be great though

This is my very first account...

Apologies then! There's been a rash of new accounts from an individual who is too cowardly to keep with one account.

oh, no worries.. what kind of metrics would be helpful here?

They’re not bots they are ai skeptics who want to prove that ai isn’t actually productive we all just think it is

I can understand normies being AI skeptics, but at this point it is a pretty insane position for any developer/nerd. It's like being schizophrenic and completely out of touch with reality.

Asking for proof of improvement is a very rational reaction to the last three to five years of constant AI hype cycling.

It's a simple question that seems to make AI cheerleaders really mad.

"How are you measuring improvement."

I use AI for coding every day and see it fail all the time, I'm a seasoned developer and early tech adopter just like everyone else on HN. I'm still very skeptical because of how often these systems just miss. It's gambler's ruin on a very large scale, we remember the hits and forget the misses.

What kind of metrics are you looking for? No one answers that question. It's like asking for clinical trial results about whether or not a parachute works and if you should use one when jumping out of a plane.

I don't expect AI to be perfect. Are people perfect? I leave room for corrections, but at this point they are usually minor and acceptable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com