On: I've been using Claude Code for a couple of days

[jmull]

> …many (potentially thousands) of rules, and then iteratively adding to and amending the rules as you go…

Is this an especially better (easier, more efficient) route to a working, quality app/system than conventional programming?

I’m skeptical if the answer to the way to achieve 10x results is 10x more effort.

[fallinditch → jmull]

It's such a fast moving space, perhaps the need for 'rules' is just a temporary thing, but right now the rules will help you to achieve more predictable results and higher quality code.

You could easily end up with a lot of rules if you are working with a reasonably large codebase.

And as you work on your code, every time you have to deal with an issue of the code generation you ask Cursor to create a new rule so that next time it does it correctly.

In terms of AI programming vs conventional programming, the writing's on the wall: AI assistance is only getting better and now is a good time to jump on the train. Knowing how to program and configure your AI assistants and tools is now a key software engineering skill.

[habinero → fallinditch]

Or it's just a bubble and after diminishing returns they'll go in the bin with all the blockchain startups lol

[ZeroTalent → jmull]

10x more effort once, 10x faster programming forever. Also once you got examples of the rules files, LLM can write most of them for next projects.

[crucialfelix → jmull]

I think specifying rules could be very useful in the same way as types, documentation, coding styles, advanced linting, semgrep etc.

We could use it for LLM driven coding style linting. Generate PRs for refactoring. Business logic bug detector

Also, you can just tell copilot to write rules for you.