[HN Gopher] I've been loving Claude Code on the web
___________________________________________________________________
I've been loving Claude Code on the web
Author : speckx
Score : 73 points
Date : 2025-10-28 16:46 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ben.page)
(TXT) w3m dump (ben.page)
| jaffa2 wrote:
| Any good demos of what claude code can do?
| embedding-shape wrote:
| In what area? I've been able to get it to do pretty much
| whatever I've tried it with so far, although probably Codex
| produces better code overall, even with the same prompts, and
| also have a web version. Although personally I prefer the CLIs.
| jaffa2 wrote:
| Im still learning. All i know is claude.ai website chat. I
| thought claude code was a different thing. Not sure what
| codex is yet. Ive been using gemini assist in vscode for a
| week now, its kinda like just using it on the web but of
| course it edits your for you. Sometimes it 'cant apply the
| changes though'
| yeutterg wrote:
| Agreed. I can vibe code from an iPad now. Workflow is Claude Code
| for Web + Vercel.
| tonicbbleking wrote:
| It really bothers me that it doesn't have support for
| devcontainers.
|
| Only a closed set of languages are supported and the hook for
| startup installation of additional software seems to be not fully
| functioning at the moment.
| igor47 wrote:
| Yeah and my preferred tools (mise) are missing from the
| environment, and installing it requires arcane environment
| configuration and then the LLM spends 10 minutes just trying to
| get the environment set up... On every interaction
| CuriouslyC wrote:
| You don't need claude code on the web for this, Cloudflare lets
| you spin up containers like crazy, you can boot an agent in a
| container, and as part of the boot process copy your claude
| auth token into the container. Then just ssh in, use tmux to
| make it persistent, and drive claude remotely.
| afro88 wrote:
| I was always disappointed by the Cursor version because the
| agents would make entirely new mistakes that Cursor IDE wouldn't
| make locally. Like so much that it was totally unusable.
| Completely messing up code edits to the point where a whole file
| would be deleted.
|
| Interested to give this a go. But I would also need it to be able
| to run docker compose and playwright, to keep things on the
| rails.
| andybak wrote:
| I wish it didn't make public PRs to public repos. I sometimes
| fire off really speculative and sometimes silly requests and I
| really don't want a permanent record of these on an open source
| Github project. I could work on a fork but it's still fairly
| public.
|
| Codex handles this much better. You choose when to make a PR and
| you can also just copy a .patch or git apply to your clipboard.
|
| EDIT. They might have fixed this. Just testing. Does the mobile
| android app have Claude Code support yet or is it still
| annoyingly an iOS only thing?
|
| EDIT2. It creates a public branch but not a PR. I'd still prefer
| that was a manual step.
| stavros wrote:
| How would it push stuff to a public GH repo without the pushed
| commits being public? This seems like a GitHub limitation,
| rather than a Claude one.
| andybak wrote:
| Don't push at all until I authorize it. That's what Codex
| does.
| stavros wrote:
| The web app? How do you look at the code it wrote? I've
| only used the cli.
| asadm wrote:
| The whole flow of:
|
| creating container -> cloning repo -> making change -> test ->
| send PR
|
| is too slow of a loop for me to do anything much useful. It's
| only good for trivial "one-shot" stuff.
| andybak wrote:
| I use it (and Codex web) specifically when I'm not at my desk
| (or I am but in the middle of something else) and I want to do
| something fairly speculative. Kinda either exploratory or
| investigative. I may or may not use the results but it doesn't
| get in the way of anything I'm actually currently doing. I
| mostly use Codex for this as I want to save my Claude quota for
| the task at hand.
| lsaferite wrote:
| I'd say this method of coding agent interaction is likely a
| strong contender for integrating coding agents into teams. You
| start with a really well defined ticket and a good source of
| relevant documentation for the project then set the agent loose
| by assigning it a ticket. It does it's thing, maybe asks
| questions on a group chat or in the ticket, and eventually
| produces a PR for the ticket. It's the 'interface' behind how a
| developer interacts with a project already. There's a _lot_ of
| hand-waving in there and it 's not a today or tomorrow thing,
| but it seems like it's coming fairly soon.
| asadm wrote:
| thats the premise behind the popular Devin. I don't think it
| saw any market fit.
| laborcontract wrote:
| Meanwhile, claude CLI has so many huge bugs that break the
| experience. Memory leaks, major cpu usage, tool call errors that
| require you to abandon a conversation, infinite loops, context
| leaks, flashing screens.. so many to list.
|
| I love the feature set of Claude Code and my entire workflow has
| been fine tuned around it, but i had to to codex this month.
| Hopefully the Claude Code team spends some time to slow down and
| focus on bugs.
| CuriouslyC wrote:
| I doubt it. A large part of the performance problem with CC is
| constantly writing to a single shared JSON file across all
| instances, with no sharding or other mechanisms to keep it
| performant. It's spinning a shitload of CPU and blocking due to
| constant serialization/deserialization cycles and IO. When I
| was using CC a lot, my JSON file would hit >20mb quite quickly,
| and every instance would grind to a halt, sometimes taking >15s
| to respond to keyboard input. Seriously bullshit.
|
| Everything Anthropic does from an engineering standpoint is
| bad, they're a decent research lab and that's it.
| furyofantares wrote:
| Is codex cli performant? I've been on codex all month and it
| seems to chew through my battery just like claude code did.
| CuriouslyC wrote:
| It is still slower than I'd like, at least with regards to
| UI input responsiveness, but I've never had it hard lock on
| me like CC. I can run 5-10 codex sessions and my system
| holds up fine (128GB RAM) but 8 CC instances would grind
| things to a halt after a few days of heavy usage.
| furyofantares wrote:
| Ah, yeah - same for me on that front.
| prmph wrote:
| > Everything Anthropic does from an engineering standpoint is
| bad, they're a decent research lab and that's it.
|
| This may be true, but then I wonder why it is still the case
| that no other agentic coding tool comes close to Claude Code.
|
| Take Gemini Pro: excellent model let down by a horrible
| Gemini CLI. Why are the major AI companies not investing
| heavily in tooling? So far all the efforts I've seen from
| them are laughable. Every few weeks there is an announcement
| of a new tool, I go to try it, and soon drop it.
|
| It seems to me that the current models are as good as they
| are goingto be for a long time, and a lot of the value to be
| had from LLMs going forward lies in the tooling
| CuriouslyC wrote:
| Gemini is a very powerful model, but it's tuned to be
| "oracular" rather than "agentic." The CLI isn't great but
| it's not the primary source of woe there. If you use Gemini
| with Aider in a more oracular fashion, it's still
| competitive with Claude using CC.
|
| Claude is a very good model for "vibe coding" and content
| creation. It's got a highly collapsed distribution that
| causes it to produce good output with poor prompts. The
| problem is that collapsed distribution means it also tends
| to disobey more detailed prompts, and it also has a hard
| time with stuff that's slightly off manifold. Think of it
| like the car that test drives great but has no end of
| problems under atypical circumstances. It's also a
| naturally very agentic, autonomous model, so it does well
| in low information scenarios where it has to discover task
| details.
| winrid wrote:
| Just showing a question causes CC to spin a cpu core at 100%.
| _ink_ wrote:
| I like the workflow with Codex more. Though I like working with
| Claude more. So I wish Anthropic would copy the Codex workflow.
|
| I like that Codex commits using your identity as if it was your
| changes. And I like that you can interact with it directly from
| the PR as if it was a team member.
| submeta wrote:
| You can instruct Claude Code to commit in your name. Tell it in
| the CLAUDE.md file. Or add via `# Commit as xyz` and it will
| memorize.
| _ink_ wrote:
| Ah, excellent. Thanks for sharing.
| Yeroc wrote:
| Also add `"includeCoAuthoredBy": false` to your
| `settings.json` file (you may also need to reinforce this in
| your commit prompt YMMV).
| atonse wrote:
| ahhhhh thank you! this saves me from having to add this to
| every repo's CLAUDE.md file.
| stavros wrote:
| I used Claude Code a lot until this weekend, when I gave Codex
| CLI a try, and I have to say, wow. The gpt-5-codex model is
| amazing. Sonnet 4.5 routinely gets stuff wrong, even Opus 4.1
| isn't too amazing, but GPT 5 Codex just one-shots everything.
|
| I've been using Sonnet whenever I run into the Codex limit, and
| the difference is stark. Twice yesterday I had to get Codex to
| fix something Sonnet just got entirely wrong.
|
| I registered a domain a year ago (pine.town) and it came up for
| renewal, so I figured that, instead of deleting it, I'd build
| something on it, and came up with the idea of an infinite
| collaborative pixel canvas with a "cozy town" vibe. I have ZERO
| experience with frontend, yet Codex just built me the entire damn
| thing over two days of coding:
|
| https://pine.town
|
| It's the first model I can work with and be reasonably assured
| that the code won't go off the rails. I keep adding and adding
| code, and it hasn't become a mess of spaghetti yet. That having
| been said, I did catch Codex writing some backend code that could
| have been a few lines simpler, so I'm sure it's not as good as me
| at the stuff I know.
|
| Then again, I wouldn't even have started this without Codex, so
| here we are.
| hnidiots3 wrote:
| Codex attempts to one shot for me but there's many rounds of
| refinement. I haven't used it in the last couple of weeks
| because it's disappointing. Over hyped. Gone back to Amp and a
| little bit of Cursor with Sonnet 4.5
| causal wrote:
| This is my entire problem with Codex - it will spend ten
| minutes trying to one shot a problem and usually go off the
| rails at some point, whereas Claude seems much better at
| incrementally finding the right solution with me.
| stavros wrote:
| I've heard this from many people, but I really haven't had
| this experience. Sonnet will write code that doesn't work,
| but Codex will give me working code basically every time.
| It does take longer, and it does think a lot, but I've
| never seen it go off the rails.
|
| I do look at the backend code it writes, and it seems
| moderately sane. Sometimes it overcomplicates things, which
| makes me think that there are a few dragons in the frontend
| (I haven't looked), but by and large it's been ok.
| causal wrote:
| > (I haven't looked)
|
| Oh.
| stavros wrote:
| > I do look at the backend code it writes, and it seems
| moderately sane
|
| Not good enough for you?
| causal wrote:
| It's just a different way of approaching the problem, and
| might partially explain the preference for Codex' style.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| If I'm doing a large task, I use GPT 5 Pro to write a spec
| first (with advice for Codex, broken down task list,
| snippets etc). I may also supply entire files/repos as
| context for 5 Pro to produce this.
|
| If I skip 5 Pro but still have a large task, I have Codex
| write a spec file to use as a task list and to review for
| completeness as it works.
|
| This is how you can use Codex without a plan mode.
| stavros wrote:
| I still wish it would do all that on its own, without me
| having to switch models and make sure it won't make code
| changes.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| Well, when you use GPT 5 Pro Mode it can't make any code
| changes, so not really a problem :)
|
| I have similar workflow as parent, GPT 5 Pro for aiding
| with specifications and deep troubleshooting, rely on
| Codex to ground it in my actual code and project, and to
| execute the changes.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| Codex won't read as much of your code as 5 Pro will (if
| you give it the context), and Codex will skip over
| reading in context that you give it (5 Pro can decide
| what's relevant after reading it all).
|
| Yes Codex is still very early. We use it because it's the
| best model. The client experience will only get better
| from here. I noticed they onboarded a bunch of devs to
| the Codex project in GitHub around the time of 5's
| release.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > and Codex will skip over reading in context that you
| give it
|
| That hasn't been my experience at all, neither first with
| the Codex UI since it was available to Pro users, nor
| since the CLI was available and I first started using
| that. GPT 5 Pro will (can, to be precise) only read what
| you give it, Codex goes out searching for what it needs,
| almost always.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| That's what I'm saying. Codex will search but then won't
| read full files and is stingy with ingesting context. 5
| Pro will take in a lot more context (quality up to about
| 60k input tokens) but you must give it. So sometimes you
| can even use Codex first to find what full files you
| should give to 5 Pro to create the spec/task list.
|
| What my quote meant is that once you have the context
| Codex needs to do its work, if you give it to it, it'll
| start the work right away without going and reading all
| those files again, which can help minimize context use
| within a Codex session (by having 5 Pro or just another
| Codex read in a lot of context to identify what is
| relevant for Codex instead of having Codex waste precious
| context headroom on discovery in a session that is
| dedicated to doing the work).
| causal wrote:
| It's interesting how different the subjective experiences of
| similarly-capable coding models is. My experience with Codex is
| that it tends to run off and do things without asking enough
| questions or keeping me in sync, whereas Claude seems to be
| more careful to clarify and keep me apprised of what it's
| doing.
|
| I wonder how much of it comes down to how models "train us" to
| work in ways they are most effective.
| stavros wrote:
| I think a lot of it, Claude is definitely careful and Codex
| runs off too eagerly before discussing much (and the lack of
| a plan mode doesn't help), but I think we just learn how to
| use them. These days, anything I don't like goes into the
| AGENTS.md, where I tweak the instructions until the model
| understands well.
| adventured wrote:
| I really loved using Claude. I like working with Claude more
| than GPT or Gemini. Claude is to LLMs what Firefox is to
| browsers. I just like Firefox more than Chrome. It's very
| clearly behind GPT Codex at this point though. So far I've
| found Gemini for front-end design work to be better than the
| others, and I pair it with GPT for everything else. Hopefully
| Gemini 3 is a solid improvement, I like having at least two
| LLMs at high quality to run against each other.
| stavros wrote:
| Claude Code is much better than Codex CLI, but GPT 5 Codex is
| much better than Sonnet 4.5. I wish I could use one with the
| other, but alas.
| nostrebored wrote:
| There are tools like claude-code-router. I've gone through
| the pain of getting gpt-5, gemini-2.5-pro, and other models
| wired together. The system prompt differences are too much
| though I think, claude still feels the best in claude code.
|
| I'm at the point where I have so much built up around
| claude code workflows that claude feels very good. But when
| I don't use them, I find that I immensely prefer gpt-5 (and
| for harder, design influencing questions, grok-4 heavy
| which is not available behind an API)
| stavros wrote:
| Yeah, I think the system prompts are so optimised for the
| specific model that others won't work as well, so it kind
| of defeats the purpose of being able to plug your own
| model in. I wish I could, but I know I won't get as good
| performance as with the model's native cli.
| Computer0 wrote:
| my issue with codex is it will decide to take forever and do to
| much for one line changes I should've done myself, and
| sometimes would make more changes than desired. Claude Code is
| much more expedient and keeps its scope narrow and rarely goes
| outside the bounds of my request.
| stavros wrote:
| I agree with this, I've hit it too, plus I hit Codex limits
| in a day whereas I haven't hit a Claude limit yet, but all of
| this is more than compensated for by the simple fact that the
| code that Codex writes will almost always just work.
|
| Sonnet is much less successful.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > sometimes would make more changes than desired
|
| It's really easy to steer both Claude Code and Codex against
| that though, plop "Don't do any other changes than the ones
| requested" in the system prompt/AGENTS.md and they mostly do
| good with that.
|
| I've tried the same with Gemini CLI and Gemini seems to
| mostly ignore the overall guidelines you setup for it, not
| sure why it's so much worse at that.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > . I have ZERO experience with frontend,
|
| After all these years, maybe even decades, of seeing your blog
| posts and projects on here, surely you must have had more
| experience with frontend than ZERO since you first appeared
| here? :)
| stavros wrote:
| Haha, fair, I meant "with React"!
| supportengineer wrote:
| He does have the experience... and stop calling me Shirley.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Yeah I was using Claude pretty continuously for 3, 4 months and
| then decided to give Codex a whirl and it was impressive. I'd
| consider it to be a lot more cautious and careful and less
| lazy?
|
| It is however slow, and more expensive. You can either pay the
| $20 and get maybe 2 days of work out of it, or $200 for "Pro."
| But there's nothing inbetween like the $100 USD Claude Code
| tier.
| stavros wrote:
| Yeah, I'm really missing the $100 tier. The $20 gets me a day
| of coding a week with it, which is way too little, and
| $200/mo is too much for hobby projects.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| I've personally been running the Claude Code _tool_ but
| pointed at DeepSeek 's API platform. Cheaper than both
| Anthropic and OpenAI, and about as good as Sonnet 4 was,
| I'm finding.
|
| Context window is too small though, and it sometimes has
| problems with compacting. But I was having that with Sonnet
| 4.5 as well.
| asdev wrote:
| I built a version of this which wraps multiple CLI sessions
| locally. I do think the Web aspect and being able to access your
| CC session from anywhere is cool.
|
| https://github.com/built-by-as/FleetCode
| jngiam1 wrote:
| I've been hoping that Claude Code on the Web also works with
| MCPs; so I can start getting it to do things beyond just coding.
| It's pretty awesome to use Git as a source of memory/tracking
| what's going on and pull requests as a way to build in a human-
| in-the-loop review flow.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > Git as a source of memory/tracking what's going on
|
| That specific part doesn't have anything to do with Claude Web
| though, does it? When I use Codex and Claude they repeatedly
| look up stuff in the local git history when working on things
| I've mentioned I've worked on a branch or similar. As long as
| you make any sort of mention that you've used git, directly or
| indirectly, they'll go looking for it, is my feeling.
| Void_ wrote:
| I would love for them to open up the API to this.
|
| I'd like to build an integration with Whisper Memos
| (https://whispermemos.com/)
|
| Then I'd be able to dictate a note on my Apple Watch such as:
|
| > Go into repository X and look at the screen Y, and fix bug Z.
|
| That'd be so cool.
| phoneafriend wrote:
| Love these discussions to find out what's new. For me replit.com
| is still the GOAT.
|
| - Time to start your container (or past project) is ~1 sec to 1
| min. - Fully supported NixOS container with isolated, cloned
| agent layer. Most tools available locally to cut download times
| and ai web access risk. - Github connections are persistent.
| Agents do a reasonable job with clean local commits. - Very fast
| dev loops (plan/build/test/architect/fix/test/document/git commit
| / push to user layer) with adjustable user involvement. - Phone
| app is fully featured... I've never built apps on roadtrips
| before replit. - Uses claude code currently (has used chatgpt in
| the past).
|
| Tips: - Consider tig to help manage git from cli before you push
| to github. - Gitlab can be connected but is clumsy with
| occasional server state refreshes. - Startups that haven't
| committed to an IDE yet and expect compatibility with NixOS would
| have strong reason to consider this. It should save them the need
| to build their own OS-local AI code through early builds.
| nadermx wrote:
| Honestly, I'm just flabbergasted at how incredible these tools
| are. I was able to build https://www.standup.net in a few days.
| Also was able update an old project
| https://www.microphonetest.com in a matter of hours with a
| plethora of features. Its truly addicting.
| righthand wrote:
| We no longer swoon over IDE features but now Llm correctness and
| novelty.
| complianceowl wrote:
| I have a question prompted by seeing what everyone is doing with
| Codex and Claude Code. I'm currently in a Data Analytics, B.S.
| program. I've thought of dropping out and focusing on coding with
| these AI tools, but some programmers have told me that by knowing
| SQL, Python, JavaScript and how to code in general, that it'll
| give me an advantage.
|
| Is the 1.5 years that I have left worth it? (I already have an
| Associate's Degree).
| perfmode wrote:
| What does this mean for products like Terragon and Sculptor?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-28 23:01 UTC)