[netdevphoenix]

> Not my experience. It excels in existing codebases too.

Why don't you prove it?

1. Find an old large codebase in codeberg (avoiding the octopus for obvious reasons)

2. Video stream the session and make the LLM convo public

3. Ask your LLM to remove jQuery from the db and submit regular commits to a public remote branch

Then we will be able to judge if the evidence stands

[aurareturn]

I don't have to prove it. I do it every single day at work in a real production codebase that my business relies on.

And I don't remove jQuery every day. Maybe the OP is right that Opus 4.6 sucks at removing jQuery. I don't know. I've never asked an AI to do it.

    The moment you point it at a real, existing codebase - even a small one - everything falls apart.

This statement is absolutely not true based on my experience. Codex has been amazing for me at existing code bases.

[netdevphoenix]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. "Works on my machine" ain't it.

[simonw]

What are the obvious reasons?

[netdevphoenix]

I thought it would be obvious: OpenAI has used repos on GitHub as training data. Would be like testing someone using a past paper publicly available.

Are you planning on carrying out the experiment? Regardless of the outcome, it would be of value to developers.