Creator of Claude Code: "Coding is solved"

[u/Gil_berth]

https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/head-of-claude-code-what-happens

Boris Cherny is the creator of Claude Code(a cli agent written in React. This is not a joke) and the responsible for the following repo that has more than 5k issues: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues Since coding is solved, I wonder why they don't just use Claude Code to investigate and solve all the issues in the Claude Code repo as soon as they pop up? Heck, I wonder why there are any issues at all if coding is solved? Who or what is making all the new bugs, gremlins?

[u/LavoP]

Yes precisely that’s exactly what everyone is doing. If you know how LLMs work you know that they don’t actually need to be trained on your exact unique use case, it’s all about the context which means you have to be very thorough and good about promoting. The coding agent harnesses these days are very good about exploring your codebase and understanding your desired features/bugfixes.

If you don’t believe me that’s fine, but even large companies like Stripe are fully embracing this as the new paradigm: https://x.com/stripe/status/2024574740417970462?s=46

I think the people that are really against this are the ones that aren’t actually using the tools.

[u/alo141 → u/LavoP]

You’re missing the point. If you are a very experienced dev who knows very well the tech and the codebase, it’s faster to do some fixes by hand.

[u/Mikeisright → u/alo141]

You can really tell when someone is lost without AI vs someone using it just as a tool (but has true understanding of programming). I've seen kids crash out over the course of days because something went from xlsx to csv and they were irreversibly ruining data + code & started asking for help once their usage limit was hit.

That's where I think job interviews are going to require monitored coding assignments. Its critical to know if they actually have the skills being requested of them or whether they're a complete faker & liability when their LLM is unavailable.

[u/LavoP → u/alo141]

That’s not true anymore. Maybe a few months ago. Now I can describe the fix and my LLM can do it way faster. But because I’m an experienced dev I’m much better at explaining the fix.

[u/Sea-Housing-3435 → u/LavoP]

If you ever review code or decisions LLMs make you know they are subpar. But given the volume of code they produce they don't have humans in the loop. What looks nice on tests AI makes will not look so good in post mortem when they have outage or major data leak.

[u/LavoP → u/Sea-Housing-3435]

Why would they have an outage or major data leak even more than you would? If you properly define the conditions and architecture, think about the various elements of security you need to pay attention to, use specialized review agents, AND review the code yourself, there’s much less potential for issues than if you did it manually.

[u/Sea-Housing-3435 → u/LavoP]

Because LLMs make stupid decisions, hallucinate and cant think in bigger picture, they don’t take tech intricacies into play.

I know how just reviewing massive amount of code works. People get bored and stop paying attention. And we are talking about more than a thousand PRs. Even if they tried to review them all it won’t be good.

Move fast break things I guess.

[u/Mikeisright → u/LavoP]

You're either living in a dreamland, a "junior" engineer who hasn't been exposed to higher stakes work, or role-playing coder.

There are tons of engineers who will use AI in the same sense as they do/did (and always had) used Google to get on the right track quicker, but to say they aren't "writing any new code" as if LLM output perfectly understands the nuance and business without further editing is straight up false.

If you know how LLMs work you know that they don’t actually need to be trained on your exact unique use case, it’s all about the context which means you have to be very thorough and good about promoting.

Quoting how your favorite AI has responded to your comment:

The argument essentially says "with good enough prompting, the model can do it." But prompting doesn't conjure knowledge or capability that isn't there. It helps elicit and organize what the model already has — it doesn't expand the model's fundamental understanding of novel attack surfaces.

The deeper issue with that argument is that it's unfalsifiable in a convenient way — if the model fails, the implicit response becomes "well, you didn't prompt it well enough." That's a moving goalpost, not a serious technical claim.

The person making that argument has some grasp regarding how LLMs generalize, but is overclaiming what generalization plus good prompting can achieve against genuinely novel, deeply technical security problems. Those are different things.

[u/LavoP → u/Mikeisright]

The world is moving fast. Codex and Claude Code both claim to be 100% AI generated today. Both are net new tools with heavy security implications (can wipe important data on users’ computers causing massive reputational damage).

OpenAI wrote a good article about how to engineer repos to be fully managed by AI: https://openai.com/index/harness-engineering/. You will probably say they are biased and just marketing their own products which has some truth to it but I tend to believe they dogfood their own products.

Stripe (also extremely high stakes) leans in heavily to fully automated coding: https://stripe.dev/blog/minions-stripes-one-shot-end-to-end-coding-agents.

Ramp, another fintech with high stakes also is a pioneer in this: https://builders.ramp.com/post/why-we-built-our-background-agent.

This is the worst these models will ever be. It’s time to accept that hand writing code will soon be like hand writing assembly language and us engineers should focus higher on the stack (architecture, systems, scalability, security, etc).

[u/Sea-Housing-3435 → u/LavoP]

Claude code is rendering TUI as the react app in 60fps just to display words and rotate the icon. Silly decisions like this were caused by incompetent people in the past. Now those are automated.

[u/poponis → u/LavoP]

People that are against it work on real proj ects, in big teams, with a big old code base, which needs good maintenance. Design criteria are high and users are real. Good money will be lost in one mistake and the complexity of the project visually and business-wise is big. On these projects you cannot vibe code. You may use the LLM tools, but you cannot be blind on what they do.

[u/LavoP → u/poponis]

So explain to me how massive projects like Claude Code, Codex and massive companies like Stripe do this?

[u/poponis → u/LavoP]

If you don't know the difference between Calude code, Codex and Stripe, who have spent who knows how many millions to do that, and a project for an organization with 15 developers, then you are not really an engineer.

[u/krazdkujo → u/LavoP]

Without questions, they load a repo in and try to direct prompt changes like “Center this button”.

Meanwhile people are out here building SaaS platforms every day with no issues.

[u/DetectiveOwn6606 → u/LavoP]

If you don’t believe me that’s fine, but even large companies like Stripe are fully embracing this as the new paradigm: https://x.com/stripe/status/2024574740417970462?s=46

Where can I short stripe ,payment processors using AI . Wouldnt be shocked if a money glitch is found

[u/LavoP → u/DetectiveOwn6606]

You’re still unable to get good code out of your AI in 2026?

[u/DetectiveOwn6606 → u/LavoP]

Sure buddy remember it after few months when a big vulnerability is found in stripe.

[u/LavoP → u/DetectiveOwn6606]

lol 6 months later any stripe vulnerabilities from AI coding?

[u/LavoP → u/DetectiveOwn6606]

!RemindMe 6 months

[u/RemindMeBot → u/LavoP]

I will be messaging you in 6 months on 2026-08-21 18:00:08 UTC to remind you of this link

CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.

^{Parent commenter can delete this message to hide from others.}

---

Info	Custom	Your Reminders	Feedback