Lee Moore
140 posts

Lee Moore
@leegmoore
AI Dev Guy, Principal Engineer, Enabler of Agentic SDLC nonsense
เข้าร่วม Eylül 2008
93 กำลังติดตาม63 ผู้ติดตาม

@TechByTaraa if you only use one or the other, you are already hobbling yourself
English

Making great specs forces you to get clarity on what you want. Having great specs provide agents high signal instructions for build and test. They give the PR easy no-slop-gates before the human reviewer spends valuable attention on it.
dex@dexhorthy
If you feel like PR review / code review is the bottleneck in your system - figure out how to increase the odds that the code is 95% or 99% correct by the time it gets to review. You’re not spending enough time on writing a great spec, and thats why the implementation deviates. Incorrect decisions earlier cascade down. Its all comes down to back pressure.
English

If you feel like PR review / code review is the bottleneck in your system - figure out how to increase the odds that the code is 95% or 99% correct by the time it gets to review.
You’re not spending enough time on writing a great spec, and thats why the implementation deviates. Incorrect decisions earlier cascade down. Its all comes down to back pressure.
English

@bentlegen It's not all Machiavellian Machinations. GLM 5.2 has brought crossed the Opus 4.5 inflection point in coding. This is a big fucking deal for open weight
English

Every hosting provider understands that if Claude/Codex can build and publish websites (they can), they are now competitors
Gotta promote alternatives, especially open ones
Chubby♨️@kimmonismus
Even the Vercel CEO is impressed/shocked at how good GLM-5.2 in coding is. open source, open weights.
English

@mattpocockuk It’s a side effect of distilling a smaller model for coding activities and related long horizon agentic work, it gets worse at general tasks (like working out how to teach solving a rubics cube) This isn’t an opus 4.6 replacement for all tasks, just some big things like coding
English

They also work well for language ports of modular software with lots of tests. Port tests for a module then port the module. Rinse repeat for all modules. If 80% of the code is like that you can knock all that out with a decent control loop
This is why Jared Sumner felt comfortable using Mythos and Dynamic Workflows (Claude code control loop generator) to port (many say slop is a better verb than port) Bun to Rust
English

They also work well for language ports of modular software with lots of tests. Port tests for a module then port the module. Rinse repeat for all modules. If 80% of the code is like that you can knock all that out with a decent control loop
This is why Jared Sumner felt comfortable using Mythos and Dynamic Workflows (Claude code control loop generator) to port (many say slop is a better verb than port) Bun to Rust
English

I've been messing with this off and on. Do you extend lint rules in language linters like eslint or do you write custom cli wired into bun/pnpm scripts for different layers of deterministic code quality/Architecture adherence linting? or do you do it it another way?
I agree it's not sufficient but it's another dev time feedback mechanism to help keep agents on rails and I don't see many folks sharing their specific techniques and tips on how they do it
English

you should have a linter
Hands down
You should have detailed rules, you should push determinism as far as it can go
Use ast analysis to tell your coding agents what needs to be fixed
You should absolutely do this
BUT
If your anti-slop strategy is an LLM and a handful of linters
You’re gonna be disappointed
English

@ZackKorman As a Principal Engineer at one of these scrub companies I 100% agree. I wasn't disagreeing with the shitty part, just the what flavor of shitty it was
English

@leegmoore Scrub f500 companies happen to have a huge amount of software and systems
English

Nothing. Though I'd say GLM-5.2 has opus 4.6 like capabilities and 4.7 and 4.8 are functionally regressions (despite the benchmarks) so current glm 5.2 hit original 4.6 performance (4 months old) so fable from china in 3-6 months? Probably pre-training it now. Unless they need an unnerfed Mythos/Fable to distill from , then it will be a bit longer
English

If GLM-5.2 has Opus 4.8-like capabilities, then what prevents Z.ai from creating a Mythos/Fable level AI? Is the cat already out of the bag wrt higher capable models?
English

Funny how it's hype (or fake news) when we disagree. I suppose it's easier to call hype rather than hold the tension of "A lot of smart people actively engaged with this stuff currently disagree with me". Smart people could be wrong and you could be right. Or vice versa. Time will tell.
I personally think GLM is 5.2 opus 4.5/4.6 level. And both 4.6 and 5.2 function better and more reliably than opus 4.7 or 4.8. GLM 5.2 hitting opus 4.5/4.6 level isn't that big a deal. it's 4-5 months behind still. So the excitement IMO is a function of 4.7 and 4.8 having 1 in every 5-8 turns being a total dumbass in an unpredictable way has lots of weird distillation and RL tics that GLM 5.2 doesn't have. So we've been living for 2 versions and several months in opus regressions.
English

@ryanflorence You're almost there. Here's how you do it properly.
/goal Do my job for me. Don't make mistakes.
English










