[HN Gopher] My experience with Claude Code after two weeks of ad...
___________________________________________________________________
My experience with Claude Code after two weeks of adventures
Author : dejavucoder
Score : 95 points
Date : 2025-07-17 18:27 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (sankalp.bearblog.dev)
(TXT) w3m dump (sankalp.bearblog.dev)
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| One approach to improving CC's search is to use Repo Prompt
| https://repoprompt.com
| dejavucoder wrote:
| Thanks, I will check this out
| voicedYoda wrote:
| Be lovely if i could sign up for Claude using my g voice number
| fuzzy2 wrote:
| Or no number even. Sucks to be missing out, but I won't budge
| on this.
| ctoth wrote:
| Sometimes, you'll just have a really productive session with
| Claude Code doing a specific thing that maybe you need to do a
| lot of.
|
| One trick I have gotten some milage out of was this: have Claude
| Code research Slash commands, then make a slash command to turn
| the previous conversation into a slash command.
|
| That was cool and great! But then, of course you inevitably will
| interrupt it and need to do stuff to correct it, or to make a
| change or "not like that!" or "use this tool" or "think harder
| before you try that" or "think about the big picture" ... So you
| do that. And then you ask it to make a command and it figures out
| you want a /improve-command command.
|
| So now you have primitives to build on!
|
| Here are my current iterations of these commands (not saying they
| are optimal!)
|
| https://github.com/ctoth/slashcommands/blob/master/make-comm...
|
| https://github.com/ctoth/slashcommands/blob/master/improve-c...
| whatever1 wrote:
| I find amazing all the effort that people put trying to program
| a non deterministic black box. True courage.
| ctoth wrote:
| Oh do let me tell you how much effort I put into tending my
| non-deterministic garden or relationships or hell even the
| contractors I am using to renovate my house!
|
| A few small markdown documents and putting in the time to
| understand something interesting hardly seems a steep price!
| blub wrote:
| The contractors working on my house sometimes paint a room
| bright pink for no particular reason.
|
| When I point that out, they profusely apologize and say
| that _of course_ the walls must be white and wonder why
| they even got the idea of making them pink in the first
| place.
|
| Odd, but nice fellows otherwise. It feels like they're 10x
| more productive than other contractors.
| ctoth wrote:
| I asked my contractor to install a door over the back
| stairs opening outward, came back, and it was installed
| opening inward. He told me he tried to figure out a way
| he could do it in-code, but there wasn't one, so that's
| what he had to do. I was slightly miffed he didn't
| consult me first, but he did the pragmatic thing.
|
| This actually happened to me Monday.
|
| But sure, humans are deterministic clockwork mechanisms!
|
| Are you now going to tell me how I got a bad contractor?
| Because that sure would sound a lot like "you're using
| the model wrong"
| tick_tock_tick wrote:
| I mean I get your trying to make a joke but a contractors
| fucking up paint and trying to gaslight you into
| believing it's the one you signed off on isn't that rare.
| simlevesque wrote:
| Our brains are non deterministic black box. We just don't
| like to admit it.
| iambateman wrote:
| Claude Code is hard to describe. It's almost like I changed jobs
| when I started using it. I've been all-in with Claude as a
| workflow tool, but this is literally steroids.
|
| If you haven't tried it, I can't recommend it enough. It's the
| first time it really does feel like working with a junior
| engineer to me.
| dejavucoder wrote:
| Almost feels like a game as you level up!
| arealaccount wrote:
| Weirdly enough I have the opposite experience where it will
| take several minutes to do something, then I go in and debug
| for a while because the app has become fubar, then finally
| realize it did the whole thing incorrectly and throw it all
| away.
|
| And I reach for Claude quite a bit because if it worked as well
| for me like everyone here says, that would be amazing.
|
| But at best it'll get a bunch of boilerplate done after some
| manual debugging, at worst I spend an hour and some amount of
| tokens on a total dead end
| jm4 wrote:
| You can tell Claude to verify its work. I'm using it for data
| analysis tasks and I always have it check the raw data for
| accuracy. It was a whole different ballgame when I started
| doing that.
|
| Clear instructions go a long way, asking it to review work,
| asking it to debug problems, etc. definitely helps.
| vunderba wrote:
| _> You can tell Claude to verify its work_
|
| Definitely - with ONE pretty big callout. This only works
| when a clear and quantifiable rubric for verification can
| be expressed. Case in point, I put Claude Code to work on a
| simple react website that needed a "Refresh button" and
| walked away. When I came back, the button was there, and it
| had used a combination of MCP playwright + screenshots to
| _roughly_ verify it was working.
|
| The problem was that it decided to "draw" a circular arrow
| refresh icon and the arrow at the end of the semicircle was
| facing towards the circle centroid. Anyone (even a layman)
| would take one look at it and realize it looked ridiculous,
| but Claude couldn't tell even when I took the time to
| manually paste a screenshot asking if it saw any issues.
|
| While it would also be unreasonable to expect a junior
| engineer to _hand-write_ the coordinates for a refresh icon
| in SVG - they would never even attempt to do that in the
| first place realizing it would be far simpler to find one
| from Lucide, Font Awesome, emojis, etc.
| yakz wrote:
| I second this and would add that you really need an
| automated way to do it. For coding, automated test suites
| go a long way toward catching boneheaded edits. It will
| understand the error messages from the failed tests and fix
| the mistakes more or less by itself.
|
| But for other tasks like generating reports, I ask it to
| write little tools to reformat data with a schema
| definition, perform calculations, or do other things that
| are fairly easy to then double-check with tests that
| produce errors that it can work with. Having it "do math in
| its head" is just begging for disaster. But, it can easily
| write a tool to do it correctly.
| tcdent wrote:
| This has a lot to do with how you structure your codebase; if
| you have repeatable patterns that make conventions obvious,
| it will follow them for the most part.
|
| When it drops in something hacky, I use that to verify the
| functionality is correct and then prompt a refactor to make
| it follow better conventions.
| hnaccount_rng wrote:
| Yeah that is kind of my experience as well. And - according
| to the friend who highly recommended it - I gave it a task
| that is "easily within its capabilities". Since I don't think
| I'm being gaslighted, I suspect it's me using it wrong. But I
| really can't figure out why. And I'm on my third attempt
| now..
| 0x_rs wrote:
| Some great advice I've found that seems to work very well:
| ask it to keep a succinct journal of all the issues and
| roadblocks found during the project development, and what was
| done to resolve or circumvent them. As for avoiding bloating
| the code base with scatterbrained changes, having a tidy
| architecture with good separation of concerns helps leading
| it into working solutions, but you need to actively guide it.
| For someone that enjoys problem-solving more than actually
| implementing them, it's very fun.
| taude wrote:
| to continue on this, I wouldn't let claude or any agent
| actually create a project structure, i'd guide it in the
| custom system prompt. and then in each of the folders
| continue to have specific prompts for what you expect the
| assets to be coded like, and common behavior, libraries,
| etc....
| taude wrote:
| do you create the claude.md files at several levels of your
| folder structure, so you can teach it how to do different
| things? Configuring these default system prompts is required
| to get it to work well.
|
| I'd definitely watch Boris's intro video below [1]
|
| [1] Boris introduction:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eBSHbLKuN0 [2] summary of
| above video: https://www.nibzard.com/claude-code/
| dawnerd wrote:
| By the time you do all of that you might as well just write
| code by hand.
| libraryofbabel wrote:
| Sigh. As others have commented, over and over again in the
| last 6 months we've seen discussions on HN with the same
| basic variation of "Claude Code [or whatever] is amazing"
| with a reply along the lines of "It doesn't work for me, it
| just creates a bunch of slop in my codebase."
|
| I sympathize with both experiences and have had both. But I
| think we've reached the point where such posts (both positive
| and negative) are _completely useless_, _unless_ they 're
| accompanied with a careful summary of at least:
|
| * what kind of codebase you were working on (language, tech
| stack, business domain, size, age, level of cleanliness,
| number of contributors)
|
| * what exactly you were trying to do
|
| * how much experience you have with the AI tool
|
| * is your tool set up so it can get a feedback loop from
| changes, e.g. by running tests
|
| * how much prompting did you give it; do you have CLAUDE.me
| files in your codebase
|
| and so on.
|
| As others pointed out, TFA also has the problem of not being
| specific about most of this.
|
| We are still learning as an industry how to use these tools
| best. Yes, we _know_ they work really well for some people
| and others have bad experiences. Let 's try and move the
| discussion beyond that!
| reactordev wrote:
| Seconded, that a summary description of your problem,
| codebase, programming dialect in use, should be included
| whenever a "<Model> didn't work for me" response.
| dejavucoder wrote:
| Fair point.
|
| For context, I was using Claude Code on a Ruby + Typescript
| large open source codebase. 50M+ tokens. They had specs and
| e2e tests so yeah I did have feedback when I was done with
| a feature - I could run specs and Claude Code could form a
| loop. I would usually advise it to fix specs one by one.
| --fail-fast to find errors fast.
|
| Prior to Claude Code, I have been using Cursor for an year
| or so.
|
| Sonnet is particularly good at NextJS and Typescript stuff.
| I also ran this on a medium sized Python codebase and some
| ML related work too (ranging from langchain to Pytorch lol)
|
| I don't do a lot of prompting, just enough to describe my
| problem clearly. I try my best to identify the relevant
| context or direct the model to find it fast.
|
| I made new claude.md files.
| state_less wrote:
| Here's a few general observations.
|
| Your LLM (CC) doesn't have your whole codebase in context,
| so it can run off and make changes without considering that
| some remote area of the codebase are (subtly?) depending on
| the part that claude just changed. This can be mitigated to
| some degree depending on the language and tests in place.
|
| The LLM (CC) might identify a bug in the codebase, fix it,
| and then figure, "Well, my work here is done." and just
| leave it as is without considering ramifications or that
| the same sort of bug might be found elsewhere.
|
| I could go on, but my point is to simply validate the
| issues people will be having, while also acknowledging
| those seeing the value of an LLM like CC. It does provides
| useful work (e.g. large tedious refactors, prototyping,
| tracking down a variety of bugs, and so on...).
| simonw wrote:
| Right, which is why having a comprehensive test suite is
| such an enormous unlock for this class of technology.
|
| If your tests are good, Claude Code can run them and use
| them to check it hasn't broken any distant existing
| behavior.
| dawnerd wrote:
| Not always the case. It'll just go and "fix" the tests to
| pass instead of fixing the core issue.
| imiric wrote:
| It's telling that you ask these details from a comment
| describing a negative experience, yet the top-most comment
| full of praises and hyperbole is accepted at face value.
| Let's either demand these things from both sides or from
| neither. Just because your experience matches one side,
| doesn't mean that experiences different from yours should
| require a higher degree of scrutiny.
|
| I actually think it's more productive to just accept how
| people describe their experience, without demanding some
| extensive list of evidence to back it up. We don't do this
| for any other opinion, so why does it matter in this case?
|
| > Let's try and move the discussion beyond that!
|
| Sharing experiences using anecdotal evidence covers most of
| the discussion on forums. Maybe don't try to police it, and
| either engage with it, or move on.
| libraryofbabel wrote:
| I should have been clearer - I'd like to see this kind of
| information from positive comments as well. It's just as
| important. If someone is having success with Claude Code
| while vide-coding a toy app, I don't care. If they're
| having success with it on a large legacy codebase, I want
| them to write a blog post all about what they're doing,
| because that's extremely useful information.
| gilfoy wrote:
| It's telling that they didn't specifically address it at
| the negative experience and you filled that in yourself
| 0x457 wrote:
| There are some tasks that it can fail and not, but a lot of
| "Claude Code [or whatever] is amazing" with a reply along
| the lines of "It doesn't work for me, it just creates a
| bunch of slop in my codebase." IMO is "i know how to use
| it" vs "I don't know how to use it" with a side of "I have
| good test coverage" vs "tests?"
| rstuart4133 wrote:
| [delayed]
| wyldfire wrote:
| I have seen both success and failure. It's definitely cool
| and I like to think of it as another perspective for when I
| get stuck or confused.
|
| When it creates a bunch of useless junk I feel free to
| discard it and either try again with clearer guidelines (or
| switch to Opus).
| pragmatic wrote:
| Could you elaborate a bit on the tasks,languages,domain etc
| you're using it with?
|
| People have such widely varying experiences and I'm wondering
| why.
| criddell wrote:
| I haven't had great luck with Claude writing Windows Win32
| (using MFC) in C++. It invents messages and APIs all the time
| that read like exactly what I want it to do.
|
| I'd think Win32 development would be something AIs are very
| strong at because it's so old, so well documented, and
| there's a ton of code out there for it to read. Yet it still
| struggles with the differences between Windows messages,
| control notification messages, and command messages.
| thegrim33 wrote:
| I find it pretty interesting that it's a roughly 2,500 word
| article on "using Claude Code" and they never once actually
| explain what they're using it for, what type of project
| they're coding. It's all just so generic. I read some of it
| then realize that there was absolutely no substance in what I
| just read.
|
| It's also another in my growing list of data points towards
| my opinion that if an author posts meme pictures in their
| article, it's probably not an article I'm interested in
| reading.
| kraftman wrote:
| Yeah I got about half way through before thinking "wow
| theres no information in this" and giving up.
| _se wrote:
| It's always POC apps in js or python, or very small libraries
| in other popular languages with good structure from the
| start. There are ways to make them somewhat better in other
| cases (automated testing/validation/linting being a big one),
| but for the type of thing that 95% of developers are doing
| day to day (working on a big, sprawling code base where none
| of those attributes apply), it's not close to being there.
|
| The tools really do shine where they're good though. They're
| amazing. But the moment you try to do the more "serious" work
| with them, it falls apart rapidly.
|
| I say this as someone that uses the tools every day. The only
| explanation that makes sense to me is that the "you don't get
| it, they're amazing at everything" people just aren't working
| on anything even remotely complicated. Or it's confirmation
| bias that they're only remembering the good results - as we
| saw with last week's study on the impact of these tools on
| open source development (perceived productivity was up, real
| productivity was down). Until we start seeing examples to the
| contrary, IMO it's not worth thinking that much about. Use
| them at what they're good at, don't use them for other tasks.
|
| LLMs don't have to be "all or nothing". They absolutely are
| not good at everything, but that doesn't mean they aren't
| good at anything.
| Herring wrote:
| I also like them for refactoring, writing tests, and
| "explain this massive codebase please". Basically polishing
| or investigating things that already work.
|
| But I think we should expect the scope of LLM work to
| improve rapidly in the next few years.
|
| https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-
| com...
| kbuchanan wrote:
| I've had the same experience, although I feel like Claude is
| far more than a junior to me. It's ability to propose options,
| make recommendations, and illustrate trade-offs is just unreal.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| > It's the first time it really does feel like working with a
| junior engineer to me.
|
| I have mixed feelings; because this means there's really no
| _business_ reason to ever hire a junior; but it also (I think)
| threatens the stability of senior level jobs long term,
| especially as seniors slowly lose their knowledge and let
| Claude take care of things. The result is basically: When did
| you get into this field, by year?
|
| I'm actually almost afraid I need to start crunching Leetcode,
| learning other languages, and then apply to DoD-like jobs where
| Claude Code (or other code security concerns) mean they need
| actual honest programmers without assistance.
|
| However, the future is never certain, and nothing is ever
| inevitable.
| Quarrelsome wrote:
| > because this means there's really no business reason to
| ever hire a junior
|
| aren't these people your seniors in the coming years? Its
| healthy to model an inflow and outflow.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| The pipeline dries up when orgs would rather get the
| upfront savings of gen AI productivity gains versus invest
| in talent development.
| apwell23 wrote:
| half the posts on hackernews is same discussion over and over
| about coding agent usefulness or lack of
| ivanech wrote:
| Just got it at work today and it's a dramatic step change
| beyond Cursor despite using the same foundation models. Very
| surprising! There was a task a month ago where AI assistance
| was a big net negative. Did the same thing today w/ Claude Code
| in 20ish minutes. And for <$10 in API usage!
|
| Much less context babysitting too. Claude code is really good
| at finding the things it needs and adding them to its context.
| I find Cursor's agent mode ceases to be useful at a task time
| horizon of 3-5 minutes but Claude Code can chug away for 10+
| minutes and make meaningful progress without getting stuck in
| loops.
|
| Again, all very surprising given that I use sonnet 4 w/ cursor
| + sometimes Gemini 2.5 pro. Claude Code is just so good with
| tools and not getting stuck.
| iambateman wrote:
| Cool! If you're on pro, you can use a _lot_ of claude code
| without paying for API usage, btw.
| wrs wrote:
| There is a VS Code extension for Claude Code. It's hardly more
| than a terminal window really, but that in itself is pretty
| handy. If you do /ide to connect up the extension it does a few
| things, but not yet anything resembling the Cursor diff
| experience (much less the Cursor tab experience, which is the
| reason I still use it).
| dejavucoder wrote:
| I use Claude Code 50% of times with Cursor now due to the diff
| and tab. The extension is just a bit buggy sometimes otherwise
| I would use it much more. I hit some node related bugs today
| while searching stuff with it (forgot to report to Anthropic
| lol). Other bugs include a scroll stuttering.
| mike1o1 wrote:
| Claude Code has pretty much replaced Copilot overnight for me,
| though I wish the VS Code plugin was a bit more integrated, as
| it's only a little bit more than a terminal, though I guess
| that's the point. I was hoping for syntax highlighting to match
| my editor and things like that (beyond just light/dark theme).
|
| What I'd really want is a way to easily hide it, which I did
| quite frequently with Copilot as its own pane.
| deeshee wrote:
| It's great to see even the most hardcore developers who are not
| fond of change being happy with the latest releases related to
| AI-assisted development.
|
| My workflow now boils down to 2 tools really - leap.new to go
| from 0 to 1 because it also generates the backend code w/ infra +
| deployment and then I pick it up in Zed/Claude Code and continue
| working on it.
| ardit33 wrote:
| 1.So far, it is great if you know what you want, and tell it
| exactly how you want it, and AI can help you on that (basically
| intern level work).
|
| 2. When you are in a new area, but you don't want to dive deep
| and just want something quick and it is not core of the
| app/service.
|
| But, if you are experienced, you can see how AI can mess things
| up pretty quickly, hence for me it has been best used to 'fill
| in clear and well defined functionality' at peacemeal.
| Basically it is best for small bites, then large chunks.
| deeshee wrote:
| I agree. But it's also a mindset game. Experienced devs often
| approach AI with preconceptions that limit its utility -
| pride in "craftsmanship, control issues, and perfectionism
| can prevent seeing where AI truly shines. I've found letting
| go of those instincts and treating AI as a thought partner
| rather than just a code generator be super useful. The
| psychological aspects of how we interact with these tools
| might be as important as the technical ones.
|
| Bunch of comments online also reflect how there's a lot of
| "butthurt" developers shutting things down with a closed mind
| - focusing only on the negatives, and not letting the
| positives go through.
|
| I sound a bit philosophical but I hope I'm getting my point
| across.
| financltravsty wrote:
| What's your track record. What is your current scope of
| work for Claude Code?
|
| This conversation is useless without knowing the author's
| skillset and use-case.
| Quarrelsome wrote:
| > pride in "craftsmanship, control issues, and
| perfectionism
|
| I mean, do we really want our code base to not follow a
| coding standard? Or are network code not to consider
| failure or transactional issues? I feel like all of these
| traits are hallmarks of good senior engineers. Really good
| ones learn to let go a little but no senior is going to
| watch a dev automated or otherwise, circumvent six layers
| of architecture by blasting in a static accessor or smth.
|
| Craftsmanship, control issues and perfectionism, tend to
| exist for readability, to limit entropy and scope, so one
| can be more certain of the consequences of a chunk of code.
| So to consider them a problem is a weird take to me.
| 2sk21 wrote:
| I'm curious: Do you scrutinize every line of code that's
| generated?
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| At first I dd not. Now I have learned I have to.
|
| You have to watch Claude Code like a hawk. Because it's
| inconsistent. It will cheat, give up, change directions, and
| not make it clear to you that is what it's doing.
|
| So, while it's not "junior" in capabilities, it is definitely
| "junior" in terms of your need as a "senior" to thoroughly
| review everything it does.
|
| Or you'll regret it later.
| bluetidepro wrote:
| How are people using this without getting rate limited non stop?
| I pay for Claude Pro and I sometimes can't go more than 5 prompts
| in an hour without it saying I need to wait 4 hours for a
| cooldown. I feel like I'm using it wrong or something, it's such
| a frustrating experience. How do you give it any real code
| context without using all your tokens so quickly?
| terhechte wrote:
| you need the max plan to break free of most rate limits
| bluetidepro wrote:
| I wish there was a Max trial (while on Pro) to test if this
| was the case or not. Even if it was just a 24 hour trial. Max
| is an expensive trigger to pull, and hope it just solves
| this.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| FWIW I went Claude Max after Pro, and the trick is to turn
| off Opus. If you do that you can pretty much use Sonnet all
| working day in a normal session. I don't personally find
| Opus that useful, and it burns through quota at 5x the
| speed of Sonnet.
| tomashubelbauer wrote:
| I have the same issue and in recent days I seem to have gotten
| an extra helping of overload errors which hit extra hard when I
| realize how much this thing costs.
|
| Edit: I see a sibling comment mention the Max plan. I wanna be
| clear that I am not talking about rate limits here but actual
| models being inaccessible - so not a rate limit issue. I hope
| Anthropic figures this out fast, because it is souring me on
| Claude Code a bit.
| mbrumlow wrote:
| No clue. I use it for hours on end. Longest run cost me $30 in
| tokens. I think it was 4 hours of back and forth.
|
| Here is an example of chat gpt, followed by mostly Claude that
| finally solved a backlight issue with my laptop.
|
| https://github.com/mbrumlow/lumd
| singron wrote:
| I haven't used Claude Code a lot, but I was using about
| $2-$5/hour, but it varied a lot. If I used it 6 hours/day and
| worked a normal 21 workday month (126 hours), then I would
| rack up $250-$630/month in API costs. I think I could be a
| more efficient with practice (maybe $1-$3/hour?). If you
| think you are seriously going to use it, then the $100/month
| or $200/month subscriptions could definitely be worth it as
| long as you aren't getting rate limited.
|
| If you aren't sure whether to pull the trigger on a
| subscription, I would put $5-$10 into an API console account
| and use CC with an API key.
| manmal wrote:
| Try giving it a repomap, eg by including it in CLAUDE.md. It
| should pull in less files (context) that way. Exactly telling
| it which files you suspect need editing also helps. If you let
| it run scripts, make sure to tell it to grep out only the
| relevant output, or pipe to /dev/null.
| ndr_ wrote:
| I had success through Amazon Bedrock on us-east1 during
| European office hours. Died 9 minutes before 10 a.m. New York
| time, though.
| SwiftyBug wrote:
| I've been using it pretty heavily and never have I been rate
| limited. I'm not even on the Pro Max plan.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Claude Max, honestly. Worth it to me.
| stavros wrote:
| Are you using Opus?
| ToJans wrote:
| Whenever I'm rate limited (pro max plan), I stop developing.
|
| For anything but the smallest things I use claude code...
|
| And even then...
|
| For the bigger things, I ask it to propose to me a solution (when
| adding new features).
|
| It helps when you give proper guidance: do this, use that, avoid
| X, be concise, ask to refactor when needed.
|
| All in all, it's like a slightly autistic junior dev, so you need
| to be really explicit, but once it knows what to do, it's
| incredible.
|
| That being said, whenever you're stuck on an issue, or it keeps
| going in circles, I tend to rollback, ask for a proper analysis
| based on the requirements, and fill in the details of necessary.
|
| For the non-standard things (f.e. detect windows on a photo and
| determine the measurement in centimetres), you still have to
| provide a lot of guidance. However, once I told it to use xyz and
| ABC it just goes. I've never written more then a few lines of PHP
| in my life, but have a full API server with an A100 running,
| thanks to Claude.
|
| The accumulated hours saved are huge for me, especially front-end
| development, refactoring, or implementing new features to see if
| they make sense.
|
| For me it's a big shift in my approach to work, and I'd be really
| sad if I have to go back to the pre-AI area.
|
| Truth to be told, I was a happy user of cline & Gemini and spent
| hundreds of dollars on API calls per month. But it never gave me
| the feeling Claude code gave me, the reliability for this thing
| is saving me 80% of my time.
| dontlaugh wrote:
| I still don't get why I should want that.
|
| I've mentored and managed juniors. They're usually a net
| negative in productivity until they are no longer juniors.
| erentz wrote:
| There must at this point be lots and lots of actual walkthroughs
| of people coding using Claude Code, or whatever, and producing
| real world apps or libraries with them right? Would be neat to
| have a list because this is what I want to read (or watch),
| rather than people just continuously telling me all this is
| amazing but not showing me it's amazing.
| tortila wrote:
| After reading and hearing rave reviews I'd love to try Claude
| Code in my startup. I already manage Claude Team subscription,
| but AFAIK Code is not included, it only exists in Pro/Max which
| are for individual accounts. How do people use it as a
| subscription for a team (ideally with central billing)?
| dukeyukey wrote:
| You can use CC with AWS Bedrock, with all the centralised
| billing AWS offers. That's how my company handles it.
| 38 wrote:
| Claude is absolute trash. I am on the paid plan and repeatedly
| hit the limits. and their support is essentially non existing,
| even for paid accounts
| kypro wrote:
| HN has flipped so quickly on saying how AI produces unreliable
| slop, to most people using it to replace junior devs at their org
| - something I was heavily criticised for saying orgs should be
| doing a few months back.
|
| Progress doesn't end here either, imo CC is more a mid-level
| engineer with a top-tier senior engineer's knowledge. I think
| we're getting to the point where we can begin to replace the
| majority of engineers (even seniors) for just a handful of
| seniors engineers to prompt and review AI produced code and PRs.
|
| Not quite there yet, of course, but definitely feeling that shift
| starting now... There's going to be huge productivity boosts for
| tech companies towards the end this year if we can get there.
|
| Exciting times.
| hooverd wrote:
| Where do the juniors come from?
| Imanari wrote:
| PSA: you can use CC with any model via
| https://github.com/musistudio/claude-code-router
|
| The recent Kimi-K2 supposedly works great.
| dejavucoder wrote:
| thanks!
| chrismustcode wrote:
| I'd just use sst/opencode if using other models (I use it for
| Claude through Claude pro subscription too)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-07-17 23:00 UTC)