sockgrant

LLM evals are well established, are these not applicable here?

if you work on platforms, frameworks, tools that are public knowledge, then yeah. If there’s nothing unique to your project or how to write code in it, build it, deploy it, operate it, yeah.

But for some projects there will be things Claude doesn’t know about, or things that you repeatedly want done a specific way and don’t want to type it in every prompt.

The only way Claude can help improve your code cleanliness is if you write poor code?

Code coverage means nothing if you didn't carefully check every test? "and if everything was tested" do you know what code coverage is?

not gonna engage the trolling

Heck yeah! Love that way of putting it. Agree. Now there’s more time to focus on making the right architecture and carrying it out. It’s no longer a days long task to do a big refactor to remove code smells.

I agree some people go to work to work, and claude is find / good for them, but I feel that characterization of us who are loving claude is disingenuous. I’m a creative, while I loved coding and honed my craft, it was creating that always had me hooked. Claude is creating on steroids. Not to mention, it can help you massively improve your code cleanliness. All of the little nice-to-have features, the cleanups, the high unit test coverage, nagging bug fixes, etc., they’re all trivial to do now.

It’s not the same as writing code, but it’s fun.

If your coworkers can’t outpace your code output they’re either not using opus4.6 or they aren’t really trying.

It’s pretty easy to slam 20 PRs a day with some of them being complex changes. The hardest part is testing the diffs, but people are figuring that out too.

“As a designer…”

IMHO the bleeding edge of what’s working well with LLMs is within software engineering because we’re building for ourselves, first.

Claude code is incredible. Where I work, there are an incredible number of custom agents that integrate with our internal tooling. Many make me very productive and are worthwhile.

I find it hard to buy in to opinions of non-SWE on the uselessness of AI solely because I think the innovation is lagging in other areas. I don’t doubt they don’t yet have compelling AI tooling.

It’s also a description of why native wasn’t chosen from the get go.

This thread is people who ship products vs people who ship engineering.

The companies do pay a cost — lost users and revenue due to the downsides.

But they’ve determined that this cost isn’t meaningful enough to write performant native platform specific versions.

Yeah but if something stays in Electron 10 years later then either it’s not successful enough to warrant the cost of a rewrite or the payoff of the rewrite isn’t a good trade off.

In both cases if originally building in Electron was a substantial productivity boost then it sounds like it was the right choice.

Gotta love engineers. 45 minutes of reading 12 years of someone’s work and the first thing they say is “yeah I’d rewrite it”.

Every. Dang. Engineer. It’s crazy.

I try to work in a codebase for 3-6 months before coming to any wild conclusions. Usually you find that there’s some warts but it does the job and there’s complexity that was solved that you hadn’t originally noticed, and it’s not worth rewriting it just needs some love in some areas.

People hate reading other peoples code.

Was on a team this happened on and a lot of the l4 l5 Eng gossiped about how little our L7 knew

I don’t agree because not all interviews work that way, especially for teams that write cpp and c — they don’t let candidates interview in JS for instance.

I had a high level eng join a domain specific team I was on and he didn’t do well because he didn’t know the domain very well. He had general skills around leadership and communication that someone of his level should have, and it kept him afloat, but for a high level technical IC you need to be at worst fluent in the domain and at best a technical leader in the group.

At lower levels of IC generalist is fine, the blast radius of your technical decisions is smaller so it’s less risky to learn on the job.

But yeah, not knowing the domain you’re going to join, whether it’s a type of work or a programming language, you won’t be as effective.

You get massive DoS attacks pretty regularly? State sponsored hackers?

While I see your point, a lot of invention happened when someone ignored conventional wisdom and others’ failures.

Got any links to reading on this? You piqued my interest.

> Personally, I find his thinking savagely brutally straight to the point and cuts through cultural rust we've built up in our thinking process.

I believe there are good losers who are winners, but Brady is not a good loser.

Facebook and Google don’t expect 80 weeks and they do leet code interviews. I’d think most people do 40 hour weeks there.

There’s probably better code writing interviews to be conducted, but I think writing code in an interview is important. I’ve conducted many interviews in C where the candidate has years of C but doesn’t know the stack from the heap.

So I dunno, it’s not fun doing the gimmicky leet code questions but it definitely filters candidates.

I think people in this thread take them for granted… many candidates struggle with them. The ones that think they’re easy and you just gotta study a little bit — they’re honestly probably pretty smart.

Yeah FAANG have those type of interviews too.

Spoiler: it’s not top tier.

What’s the pay for someone with 10-15 years experience and is “the best people”?

Hi, I’ve worked for two of FAANG, it’s super duper easy to work outside of SV.

The reason you sound salty is because you evaluate candidates based on whatever perception you have about who they are instead of trying to understand who they are.

I’m sure you don’t care, sounds like it’s working for you, so in any event congrats on finding what makes you happy!

If you’re struggling I don’t think you should try to memorize leet code problems, you should try to understand how to apply algorithms.

High wages won’t impact a housing market with infinite supply but that’s not reality.

When there’s a lack of supply then the top earners set the market. When top earners make more then prices are higher.

Would a housing supply shortage in Mississippi produce equally priced housing as a housing shortage in San Francisco?

I’ve heard plenty of horror stories about someone being hired that couldn’t write simple code.

It’s easy to study leet code, and it’s relevant because it shows the interviewer you can write code.

I’ve had non-leet code interviews, like write some feature in 60minutes. It was fine. It tests code and knowledge as opposed to just algorithms and tricks.

I dunno I’ve always felt that the people who can’t leet code are the ones that complain about it. The ones that can just spend a bit of time to practice and ace the interview.

They’re both issues contributing to rising housing costs.

I mean there’s two camps. One camp can do them easily or with practice, another camp can’t.

The first camp is pretty “meh” about leet code interviews because for them you just study a bit and get a high paying job.

The second camp is pretty vocal about how bad leet code is because it’s somewhat of a personal attack on their abilities.

Personally I agree with the criticism that leet code can be learned with enough practice and so it’s not totally indicative of a positive hire. But then I also sorta feel like there’s enough examples out there that people should be able to ace these tests with practice.

Some SWE just write code, they wanna make features and build a product. They don’t care about this stuff because things are fast enough without the extra thought — and if they turn out not fast enough they can still fix the issue.

Other SWE are more careful with their code, performance, etc. this is more of a systems engineer personality. Writing C, managing memory, writing optimized code the first go round. Yah, being thoughtful and careful pays off here.

No one’s right or wrong imo, or one better than the other.

Should FAANG do leet code interviews? I dunno, there’s surely better ways to interview, but at the same time they’ve hired plenty of highly talented engineers so something’s working for them?

Should SWE’s just spend a few weeks on leet code and learn the tricks? Ya, it’s pretty easy. But if you don’t want the job then don’t do it?

All the endless criticism of leet code generally comes from people who fail it. Shrug.

Crazy! I was gonna come here to say this reminds me of Total Annihilation.

So it sounds like you recommend it? I'll have to check it out!

Good to know but this is pretty small deal, easily fixed, also there's probably quite a few Go backend frameworks and I doubt all of them have this issue