upvote
Understanding is needed when something breaks and you need to fix it immediately. Otherwise you become a meat proxy and now you’ve added Anthropic’s uptime as a single point of failure to your application.
reply
>Otherwise you become a meat proxy and now you’ve added Anthropic’s uptime as a single point of failure to your application.

Yes. We're all going to become meat proxies and we're all going to add LLM service uptime as a single point of failure to... every aspect of our technological civilization. But it's all worth it because Grok will let you force feminize Draco Malfoy into a anime girl and that's worth never understanding anything again.

reply
Subscribe to multiple providers, and maybe even self-host :).
reply
i refuse to be a meat proxy!
reply
So you just click around the UI, assuming there is one?

Can you break down for me exactly how the unit and integration tests are made? Do you ask the AI what to assert?

reply
> exactly how the unit and integration tests are made

There should be enough detail in the spec that it's pretty obvious. And unlike - many - human devs, agents don't shy away from writing tests. Add a coverage guardrail and tell them to use red/green TDD and you're already a good way there. The main thing is to ensure shared understanding, so they also know business expectations and write appropriate tests. And... nothing here is really specific to an agent, as a human dev also needs sufficient guidance (tailored to their experience level).

reply
This is just pure vibe coding and trying to convince yourself it's quality work. AI can't be trusted to go from an English written spec to tests

Here[0] we have benchmarks for AI writing tests for code that already has the correct behavior. Best case scenario is that they're at 67% with Fable, and that's with the highest quality specification we could possibly have (code). English is far more ambiguous

[0]: https://labs.scale.com/leaderboard/sweatlas-tw

reply
Maybe you don't trust them to, but they can go from spec to tests; I've made them (even if it initially took extra prompting and scrutiny). And ultimately tests are just a proxy to checking that X works, written by devs for devs; actually trying X is something to be done by QA and/or project/product manager before shipping.
reply
> (you did a complete spec and occasional check-ins to ensure things are on track and then tested the delivery, right?)

I have never in my career been afforded the time to make a complete spec.

reply
That's now a key task with this new role. Unless winging it into slop is acceptable.
reply