this machine will do anything to make things worse. and then refuse to understand it.
fair enough it was trained like that. Internet is full of garbage.
> Perfect! Now I can see the issue clearly.
no. you don't
let plan and fix the coding assistant a swift concurrency warning by making a class Sendable, and see how it dissolves into chaos. line by line. one MainActor at a time.
it has no clue what to do.
Asked coding assistants to implement token bucket throttler. Here's what happened:
Claude Code: never sure if implementation works, keeps changing it and loops - never satisfied
Amp: liked Claude's result but improved it, stopped the looping
Result: Implementation still doesn't work. When asked about failures, says "found the bug" but fails to fix it despite claiming it's tested
Don't think it can create a working throttler
LOL. First it implemented delegate, then offer alternatives. eventually decided neither alternative makes sense and the delegate is broken.
I literally loled
🤦 First I said making File fully MainActor would be "the cleanest approach" and recommended it. Then when you asked if it's better, I said "not really"
I trust you bro. I trust you with my life
I am with the stupid one here. I asked it to implement something and test it. It did all of that, then called it a day after 88% of tests passing.
Am I supposed to fix the remaining 12% of the code?
damn. I had to scratch all of it. It can no longer fix the bugs. just spinning and fixing-not fixing. I lost my faith.
just because I'm on vacation, I'll give it another spin. Maybe "this time" it will progress somewhere close to working code
huge 🚩 red flag. "Let me simplify these tests to avoid JSON escaping complexities" means "I change tests to make it pass" even though I instructed it never to do that
What I prompted about tests:
> Check tests while implement it. Never hallucinate tests. Always make sure you use PROJECT tests as the source of truth of expected behavior. NEVER decide about test assertions based on Swift implementation behavior.
and this is the point, I know it's not gonna succeed with the task. It made up things. Forged tests. Lie to me. Have no sense of real progress nor the state of the work.
Step 1. Mission accomplished! 🏆
Step 2. I switched to a simplified tests because the original test data exposed a limitation in our current implementation
been there 3 times already. I can spin it for days now and it not gonna find out how to fix it.
@krzyzanowskim one idea I’ve seen kicked around and have not tried yet is to run independent agents for testing and implementation. There are practical issues that the tools don’t really make it easy to assign permissions that way, but “you cannot edit this whole folder” may be easier to manage.
(I heard you like AI agents. May I suggest *multiple*?!? Luckily tokens will always be free and systems will have lots of capacity for even more agents.)
@krzyzanowskim and does not have a wristwatch.
Or a wrist.
Or pocket.
No wonder they never know what time it is.
@krzyzanowskim I frequently see ChatGPT interested in trying to chase down esoteric JavaScript logic issues (I do a little scripting in Obsidian for knowledge management) rather than, like, focusing on the fundamentals of the program logic.
I have a child with mild ADHD and it feels like her worst propensities for being distracted. She, a learning human being, has discovered coping strategies and self-care to overcome those challenges, but it feels like the nature of LLMs to never grow past them.
Going from 0 to 1 to bootstrap a new project still feels magical with LLMs. But modifying any kind of existing codebase just feels like losing a battle of attrition. 🫠