Don Montegarza

codex driver, vscode watcher

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@pvncher @Steve_Yegge i thought you said that anarchy :P

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@Pragmatic_Eng @ahejlsberg they copy it from F# -> let bang!

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@ThePrimeagen @bcherny cc @unclebobmartin

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@_lopopolo its treating everything just like a function

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@_lopopolo i just think that this agents stuff struggle with OO and encapsulation stuff

[Martin Fowler @martinfowler]

NEW POST

Four of my colleagues share their experiences in applying good security practices to vibe coding.

https://t.co/sWExBsE5SW

[Serena Ge (Datacurve) @serenaa_ge]

Today we’re releasing DeepSWE, a new standard for agentic coding benchmarks.

On public leaderboards, top models often look relatively close in capability. DeepSWE shows where they actually diverge, reflecting the realistic experience of developers in their day-to-day work.

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@thorstenball so basically at the end we will end up with what gas town looks like but slowly... and finally @Steve_Yegge is right and we are just resistance with those. cc @headinthebox

[Thorsten Ball @thorstenball]

https://t.co/PV4OLiTZnu

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@_lopopolo is that means normie overthink this? overestimate their own skills for driving the model?

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@CherryJimbo ACID is there for a reason..

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@GergelyOrosz rust is for low level program, so the layer usually not that deep. for biz apps where the layer is deeper, exception is easier as it can just bubble up to the upper layer..

[Simon Last @simonlast]

1/ Some things I've learned recently running coding agents on large-scale projects. Most of this contradicts advice from 6 months ago!

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@dillon_mulroy it should be @ctatedev

[Uncle Bob Martin @unclebobmartin]

I got my first job as a paid programmer in 1968. At that time programming looked like writing code on coding forms with pencils and then handing those forms to key punch operators who punched the cards. Then we would take those cards to the Computer room and hand them to an operator who would run a compile. The cards were read into a card reader and more cards would be punched. Those cards were the binary that were subsequently placed back into the card reader. Then the operator would push some buttons on the front control panel and the program would execute.

The first few years of my career were involved with either punched cards or paper tape. The editing terminal was always a piece of paper with a pencil. It was only after a few years that I was able to use a CRT display. Even then the main editing terminal was a piece of paper with a pencil. But we would then painstakingly type that code into the CRT display. The source code was stored on magnetic tape, which was slow and error prone, but better than punched cards.

A few years later, the source code was finally stored on discs. The discs were slow and big and ponderous. But they were better than magnetic tape. We were finally able to edit on the CRT displays. That editing was slow and ponderous, and mostly line oriented, but it was better than previously. We stopped using paper and pencil as the primary editing tool. Compiles generally took many minutes — sometimes hours.

A few years later, and now we’re in the 90s, memory got big enough, and the discs got small and fast enough that compiles that used to take an hour could be done in a few minutes. We were able to use editors like vi, or even eMacs.

In the 2000s, we left the editor world for the IDE world. I chose InteliJ for my IDE and I used that right up until five months ago. I know it’s controversial to say this, but IDEs were generally better than editors; even than eMacs. (Well, maybe ;-)

Now I don’t use now anything but a terminal window. And maybe sometimes I bring up some file in text mate.

The changes in programmer experience over the last six decades have been enormous and radical. Every one of them was good. This one is no different.

[DHH @dhh]

For complicated agent work, it's amazing how much GPT5.5 has improved. I found 5.2 to be very far behind Opus. Now using Opus 4.7 after 5.5 feels like a big step backwards. Gotta love this level of competion! Strong comeback for OpenAI.

[Uncle Bob Martin @unclebobmartin]

I am absolutely more productive using agents. I don't know the factor but it's large. However much of that productivity is spent tuning the agents and hardening the product. I'm guessing 30%-40%.

Some might consider that a waste; but I don't. The software I'm creating nowadays is vastly more robust than I'd ever been able to create manually.

I don't mean that the code is better. I mean the surrounding tests are vastly better. I have a higher degree of confidence than I ever had manually -- even when I used very disciplined TDD and Acceptance testing.

And then there's the ability to quickly reorganize the modules and the architecture while keeping those robust tests running. That is a tremendous boon.

[Mitchell Hashimoto @mitchellh]

Fork your dependencies, trim them to only your use case, never update unless it breaks for your users. I’ve been vocal about this for 10+ years. I’ve always said that updating is way riskier than latent bugs (which can be tracked and CVEs monitored).

If you are updating a dependency, it’s on you to analyze every single commit in the full transitive set of dependencies. If you dont see anything compelling, dont update!

I remember at HashiCorp once in awhile an engineer would try to update a dep or replace a DIY lib with an external one and id always ask “show me the commit we need.” Dont update for the sake of it.

Feeling pretty swell about this mentality with all the supply chain attacks happening.

[jason @jxnlco]

https://t.co/9KkXEINuIj

[Don Montegarza @aiDidThisToo]

@unclebobmartin test impact analysis saga