Fairly certain they do something like Anthropic does, they count the acceptance rate or something else that is fairly "optimistic" (my org has a code acceptance rate of 98,5% per the platform dashboard).
So, to clarify, me accepting the suggestion and then correcting it by hand still counts as N LoC accepted.
I'm building a new version control forge around Jujutsu :).
I think GitHub is pretty bad in its UX and I want to build something that is
a) more opinionated than raw git;
b) optimised more around team usage than GitHub is;
c) uses nicer algorithms for diffing, merges;
d) can be scaled slightly better than Git (in the context of entire teams of developers).
Essentially taking a lot of the good ideas already out there and turning it into a coherent product.
My experience has so far been similar to the root commenter - at the stage where you need to have a long cycle with planning it's just slower than doing the writing + theory building on my own.
It's an okay mental energy saver for simpler things, but for me the self review in an actual production code context is much more draining than writing is.
I guess we're seeing the split of people for whom reviewing is easy and writing is difficult and vice versa.
I was really taken in by this premise a while back so I tried building some side projects with server side swift on my windows machine inside WSL.
I really wanted to like it, but the experience was terrible, from the editing side (with vscode) all the way to the performance of existing frameworks (tried both Vapor and grpc-swift-2).
I understand what you mean, but at this point I don't find it ironic at all. It's been quite similar in my corner of the world, where a leader enjoys great support and visibility externally, but is fairly unpopular internally.
No, but it is a European leader that has ~recently enjoyed that situation, but is no longer in it.
Sorry, but I don't want to spell it out too obviously, for my own privacy.
But if you just want a nicely typed interface for your APIs, in my experience gRPC is much more useful, because of all of the other downsides the blog author mentioned.
Sure. You tend to think about the edges of your application.
1. Router
Tanstack Router: Supports runtime validation libraries such as z0d. So I have routes such as example.com/viewer/$uuid/$number, it should 400 if those aren't actually validate uuid and numbers.
React Router: Supports Types, but every type is a string because, well, they technically are, but this isn't useful in practice in my opinion. There are 3rd party libs such as: https://github.com/fenok/react-router-typesafe-routes
2. API
Lets say you're making your API public to clients you can't trust to send the correct data ( which probably also includes your own client ).
Not the person you asked, but I hate how it screws up keyboard shortcuts.
It overrode the delete line shortcut with its own inline chat one, for example.
Decided to ditch it for claude code right after that, since I cannot be bothered to go over the entire list of keyboard shortcuts and see what else it overrode/broke.
I've found that annoying too, but you can always rebind them as you wish. It's only a few new keybinds that get in the way of my muscle memory.
That said I also have moved to CLI agents like Claude Code and Codex because I just find them more convenient and, for whatever reason, more intelligent and more likely to correctly do what I request.
have you tried... talking to them, instead of permanently hirting their chances of staying employed in a shit economy?
its great for you principles - perfect job security, sitting up on your thrones casting judgement on entry level staffers that are forced to use LLM code to make a fast impact. maybe try teaching your juniors how to do it the right way, rather than passive aggressively impacting someones physical safety net. shame on all of you assholes.
reply