Comment by kukkeliskuu

Comment by kukkeliskuu 4 days ago

5 replies

> I realized the Claude version had a threading issue waiting to happen that was explicitly warned against in the docs of the api calls it was using.

I am reading between the lines here, trying genuinely to be helpful, so forgive me if I am not on the right track.

But based on what you write, it seems to me you might have not really gone through the disillusionment phase yet. You seem to be assuming the models "understand" more than they really are capable of understanding, which creates expectations and then disappointment. It seems to be you are still expecting CC to work at a level of a senior professional on various roles, instead of assuming it is a junior professional.

I would have probably approached that iOS app by first investigting various options how the app could be implemented (especially as I don't have deep understanding of the tech), and then explore each option to understand myself what is the best one.

The options in your example might be the Apple documentation page. It it might be some open source repo that contains something that could be used as a starting point etc.

Then I would have asked Claude to create a plan to implement the best option.

During either the option selection or planning, the threading issue would either come up or not. It might come up explicitly, in which case I could learn it from the plans. It might be implicit, just included in the generated code. Or it might not be included in the plans or in the code, even if it is explicitly stated in the documentation. If the suggested plan would be based on that documentation, then I would probably read it myself too, and might have seen the suggestion.

When reviewing the plan, I can use my prior knowledge to ask whether that issue has been taken into account. If not, then Claude would modify the plan. Of course, if I did not know about the threading issue beforehand, and did not have the general experience about the tech to suspect such as a issue, nor read the documentation and see the recommendation, I could not find the issue myself either.

If the issue is not found in planning or progamming, the issue would arise at later stage, hopefully while unit/system testing the application, or pilot use. I have not written complex iOS apps personally so I might have not caught it either -- I am not senior enough to guide it. I would ask it to plan again how to comprehenively test such an app, to learn how it should be done.

What I meant by standard SWE practices is that there are various stages (requirements, specification, design, programming, testing, pilot use) where the solution is reviewed from multiple angles, so it becomes likely that this kind of issues are caught. The best practices also include iteration. Start with something small that works. For example, first an iOS application that compiles, and shows "Hello, world" etc. and can be installed on your phone.

In my experience, CC cannot be expected to independently work as a senior professional on any role (architect, programmer, test manager, tester, pilot user, product manager, project manager). Junior might not take into account all instructions or guidance even if it is explicit. But it can act as a junior professional on any of these roles, so it can help senior professional to get the 10x productivity boost on any of these areas.

By project manager role, I mean that I am explicitly taking the CC through the various SWE stages and making sure they have been done properly, and also that I iterate on the solution. On each one of the stages, I take the role of the respective senior professional. If I cannot do it yet, I try to learn how to do it. At the same time, I work as a product manager/owner as well, to make decisions about the product, based on my personal "taste" and requirements.

imron 4 days ago

I appreciate the reply, and you trying to be helpful, but this is not what is happening.

I mean I'm definitely still in the stage of disillusionment, but I'm not treating LLMs as senior or expecting much from them.

The example I gave played out much as you described above.

I used an iterative process, with multiple self-contained smaller steps, each with a planning and discussion stage where I got the AI to identify ways to achieve what I was looking to do and weigh up tradeoffs that I then decided on, followed by a design clarification and finalisation stage, before finally getting it to write code (very hard sometimes to get the AI not to write code until the design has been finalised), followed by adjustments to that code as necessary.

The steps involved were something like:

- build the app skeleton

- open a camera feed

- display the feed full screen

- flip the feed so it responded as a mirror would if you were looking at it

- use the ios apis to get facial landmarks

- display the landmarks as dots

- detect looking in different directions and print a log message.

- detect the user opening their mouth

- play a sound when the mouth transitions from closed to open

- etc

Each step was relatively small and self-contained, with a planning stage first and me asking the AI probing/clarifying questions.

The threading issue didn't come up at all in any of this.

Once it came, the AI tied itself in knots trying to sort it out, coming up with very complex dispatching logic that still got things incorrect.

It was a fun little project, but if I compare the output it just wasn't equivalent to what I could get if I'd just started with the Apple documentation (thought maybe it's different now, as per another commenter's reply).

It's also easily completeable in a day if you want to give it a try :-) Apple Developer reference implementation [here](https://developer.apple.com/documentation/Vision/tracking-th...).

> By project manager role, I mean that I am explicitly taking the CC through the various SWE stages and making sure they have been done properly, and also that I iterate on the solution. On each one of the stages, I take the role of the respective senior professional. If I cannot do it yet, I try to learn how to do it. At the same time, I work as a product manager/owner as well, to make decisions about the product, based on my personal "taste" and requirements.

Right, this is what I do. I guess my point is that the amount of effort involved to use English to direct and correct the AI often outweighs the effort involved to just do it myself.

The gap is shrinking (I get much better results now that I did a year ago) but still there.

  • kukkeliskuu 3 days ago

    What I meant by "not treating LLM as senior" is that the disillusionment phase culminates in an a-ha moment which could be described a "LLM is not a senior developer". This a-ha moment is not intellectual, but emotional. It is possible to same time think that LLM is not a senior developer, but not realize it emotionally. This emotional realization in turn has consequences.

    >The threading issue didn't come up at all in any of this. > >Once it came, the AI tied itself in knots trying to sort it out, coming up with very complex dispatching logic that still got things incorrect.""

    Yes. These kind of loops have happened to me as well. It sometimes requires clearing of context + some inventive step to help the LLM out of the loop. For example my ad pacing feature required that I recognized that it was trying to optimize the wrong variable. I consider this to be partly what I mean by "LLM is a junior" and that "I act as the project manager".

    > I guess my point is that the amount of effort involved to use English to direct and correct the AI often outweighs the effort involved to just do it myself.

    Could you really have done a complex mobile app alone in one day without knowing the stack well beforehand? I believe this of stuff used to take months from a competent team not long time ago. I certainly could not have done one year ago what I can do today, with these tools.

    • skydhash 3 days ago

      You could. There’s a lot of code samples. But the issue is always quality and that takes time.

    • imron 3 days ago

      I'm pretty sure I have the right intellectual and emotional understanding of the AI and its abilities.

      > I consider this to be partly what I mean by "LLM is a junior" and that "I act as the project manager".

      And this is partly what I mean when I say the time I spend instructing the "junior" LLM could be just as well spent implementing the code myself - because the "project manager" side of me can work with the "senior dev" side of me at the speed of thought and often in parallel, and solving the challenges and the design of something is often where most of the time is spent anyway.

      Skills are changing this equation somewhat due to the way they can encode repeatable knowledge, but not so much for me yet especially if I'm trying things out in radically different areas (I'm still in my experimental stage with them).

      > Could you really have done a complex mobile app alone in one day without knowing the stack well beforehand?

      No, but that's not what happened here.

      The mobile app wasn't complex (literally only does the things outlined above) and I've done enough mobile development and graphics/computer vision development before that the stack and concepts involved weren't completely unknown, just the specifics of the various iOS APIs and how to string them together - hence why I initially thought it would be a good use case for AI.

      It was also an incredible coincidence that the toy app I wanted to build had an apple developer tutorial that did almost the same thing as what I was looking to build, and so yes, I clearly would have been better off using the documentation as a starting point rather than the AI.

      That sort of coincidence won't always exist, but I've thinking lately about another toy iOS/apple watch application, and I checked, and once again there is a developer tutorial that closely matches what I'm looking to build. If I ever get around to experimenting with that, the developer docs are going to be my first port of call rather than an AI.

      > I certainly could not have done one year ago what I can do today, with these tools.

      Right, and if you look back at my original reply (not to you), this is what I'm trying to understand - the what and how of AI productivity gains, because if I evaluate the output I get it's almost always either something I could have built faster and better, or if not faster then at least better and not so much slower that the AI was enabling a week of work to be done in a day, and month of work to be done in a week (claims from the GP, not you).

      I would love to be able to realize those gains - and I can see the potential but just not the results.

      • kukkeliskuu a day ago

        >The mobile app wasn't complex (literally only does the things outlined above) and I've done enough mobile development and graphics/computer vision development before that the stack and concepts involved weren't completely unknown, just the specifics of the various iOS APIs and how to string them together - hence why I initially thought it would be a good use case for AI. > >It was also an incredible coincidence that the toy app I wanted to build had an apple developer tutorial that did almost the same thing as what I was looking to build, and so yes, I clearly would have been better off using the documentation as a starting point rather than the AI.

        Ok. I have done similar, too. For example, when starting a new Django project, I will rather copy an old project as basis than create a new from scratch with LLM.

        If there already exists full documentation or repo of exactly what you are trying to do and/or it is something you have already done many times, then LLM might not add too much value, and may even be a hindrance.