upvote
Just check the leaked code yourself. Two biggest areas seem to be the `utils` module, which is a kitchen sink that covers a lot of functionality from sandboxing, git support, sessions, etc, and `components` module, which contains the react ui. You could certainly build a cli agent with much smaller codebase, with leaner ui code without react, but probably not with this truckload of functionality.
reply
Software doesn’t end at the 20k loc proof of concept though.

What every developer learns during their “psh i could build that” weekendware attempt is that there is infinite polish to be had, and that their 20k loc PoC was <1% of the work.

That said, doesn't TFA show you what they use their loc for?

reply
I think that’s why the author was comparing to to a finished 3D game.
reply
Comments like these remind me of the football spectators that shout "Even I could have scored that one" when they see a failed attempt.

Sure. You could have. But you're not the one playing football in the Champions League.

There were many roads that could have gotten you to the Champions League. But now you're in no position to judge the people who got there in the end and how they did it.

Or you can, but whatever.

reply
I don't think this is warranted given that the comment you're criticising is simply expressing an opinion explicitly solicited by the comment it's responding to.
reply
It’s more like “Player A is better than Player B” coming from a professional player in a smaller league who is certainly qualified to have that opinion.
reply
> Sure. You could have. But you're not the one playing football in the Champions League.

The only reason people are using Claude Code is because it's the only way to use their (heavily subsidized) subscription plans. People who are okay with using and paying for their APIs often opt out for other, better, tools.

Also, analogies don't work. As we know for a fact that Claude Code is a bloated mess that these "champions league-level engineers" can't fix. They literally talk about it themselves: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47598488 (they had to bring in actual Champions League engineers from bun to fix some of their mess).

reply
Honest question: Why does it matter? They got the product shipped and got millions of paying customers and totally revolutionized their business and our industry.

Engineers using LOC as a measure of quality is the inverse of managers using LOC as a measure of productivity.

reply
More code means more entropy, more room for bugs, harder to find issues, more time to fix, more attack surface, more memory used, more duplication, more inconsistencies... I bet you at some point we'll get someone reporting how AI performance deteriorates as the code base grows, and some blog post about how their team improved the success of their AI by trimming the code base down to less than 100k LOC or something like that.

The principles of good software don't suddenly vanish just because now it's a machine writing the code instead of a human, they still have to deal with the issues humans have for more than half a century. The history of programming is new developers coming up with a new paradigm, then rediscovering all the issues that the previous generation had figured out before them.

reply
The history of programming is also each generation writing far less performant code than the one before it. The history of programming is each generation bemoaning the abstractions, waste and lack of performance of the code of the next generation.

It turns out that there is a tradeoff in code between velocity and quality that smart businesses consider relative to hardware cost/quality. The businesses that are outcompeting others are rarely those who have the highest quality code, but rather those that are shipping quickly at a quality level that is satisfactory for current hardware.

reply
> far less performant code than the one before it.

That worked because of rapid advancements in CPU performance. We’ve left that era.

It’s about more than performance. Code is and always has been a liability. Even with agents, you start seeing massive slowdowns with code base size.

It’s why I can nearly one shot a simple game for my kid in 20 minutes with Claude, but using it at work on our massive legacy codebase is only marginally faster than doing it by hand.

reply
You asked why the size of the code matters, I gave you the answer. If you want to ramble about the non technical aspects of software development talk to someone else, I'm not interested.
reply
I asked a rhetorical question to get the reader to think about a topic. I was not looking for a rote recitation of a well-known textbook answer. Maybe you should not be on the comment section of an engineering website if you find discussion so offensive.
reply
It doesn't. LoC is only meaningful when you use it to belittle others' code.
reply
hehe, belittle (to make smaller)
reply
The reason it’s not useful as a measure of productivity is because it’s measure of complexity (not directly, but it’s correlated). But it tells you nothing about whether that complexity was necessary for the functionality it provides.

But given that we know the functionality of Claude Code, we can guess how much complexity should be required. We could also be wrong.

>Why does it matter?

If there’s massively more code than there needs to be that does matter to the end user because it’s harder to maintain and has more surface area for bugs and security problems. Even with agents.

reply
Exactly. Imagine if Claude Code was a PHP script. Some folks would lose their damn minds
reply
> Honest question: Why does it matter?

Because it's unmaintainable slop that they themselves don't know how to fix when something happens? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47598488

reply
deleted
reply