[elanora96]

I'm a strong believer that LLMs are tools and when wielded by talented and experienced developers they are somewhere in the danger category of Stack Overflow and transitive dependencies. This is not a critique of your project, or really the quality of LLMs, but when I see 90% of a 11,000+ loc project written in Claude, it just feels sort of depressing in a way I haven't processed yet.

I love foss, I love browsing projects of all quality levels and vintages and seeing how things were built. I love learning new patterns and sometimes even bickering over their strengths and weaknesses. An LLM generated code base hardly makes me even want to engage with it...

Perhaps these feelings are somewhat analogous to hardcopies vs ebooks? My opinions have changed over time and I read and collect both. Have you had similar thoughts and gotten over them? Do you see tools like Claude in a way where this isn't an issue?

[goosejuice]

You're romanticizing software. To place more value in the code than the outcome. There's nothing wrong with that, but most people that use software don't think about it that way.

[williamcotton]

I mean, when I'm working on something that I don't expect to be more than a throw-away experiment I'm not too worried about the code itself.

The grammar itself still seems a bit clunky and the next time I head down this path I imagine I'll go with a more hand-crafted approach.

I learned a lot about integrating Lua and jq into a project along the way (and how to make it performant), something I had no prior experience with.