While working with Claude, I spent some time understanding how compaction works. The short version is: the system doesn’t really “remember” everything, it rewrites the conversation into something shorter.
Most teams are still treating Claude like a smarter autocomplete.
That works until it doesn't, and when it breaks, it breaks in ways that are genuinely hard to debug. Not errors. Inconsistency. Context drift. Outputs that were fine yesterday and aren't today.
I've been thinking about why some teams compound on this and most don't. Turns out it comes down to one thing they do differently from the start.
Wrote it up: https://t.co/eQkbTyrBPp
#claudecode #softwareengineering @AnthropicAI
5/ I wrote the full piece. Field report from inside the infrastructure.
The graveyard of correct ideas. The concurrency problem. The India opportunity. The pricing model that's being made obsolete.
https://t.co/dZCYhZpXpj
4/ 10 years later the ideas we tried and shelved at Exotel are now funded product categories.
Sentiment analysis on calls. SOP to workflow automation. Voice biometrics.
The vision always existed. The capability layer just arrived.
But the infrastructure layer hasn't caught up. 95% of AI voice pilots are failing. Less than 1% of contact centres have autonomous agents in production.
I started blogging on https://t.co/slF74nYSlG in 2014 as a college student. Same blog. Still running.
The name came from @codinghorror's Coding Horror, named after an icon in Steve McConnell's Code Complete, used to flag cautionary examples of bad code. That lineage felt right, and codingdash stuck. It's been my corner of the internet since.
Shipped a redesign this week. The second one since starting, the first redesign I did in 2020, inspired by @Stammy's site. This one was overdue not because something broke, but because the site had quietly fallen behind the person writing it.
Short note on what changed: https://t.co/yWH0sfzwxA
I spent a long time looking for an AI code review tool that actually fit how my team works. Tried a few. None felt complete.
Hidden costs. No control over which model runs. Guidelines that were either too generic or too rigid to customise. And when things broke, no visibility into why.
So I built one over a weekend and open sourced it.
PRLens — bring your own Claude or GPT-4o key, bring your own guidelines, runs as a GitHub Action in your own pipeline. No new vendor. No black box.
Still early, lots to build. But the foundation is there and I'd love collaborators who've felt the same frustrations.
https://t.co/hT7iSDpoVK
Most AI-powered products hide their real cost structure. They bundle model inference into a flat subscription or per-seat price, the same way early SaaS bundled AWS costs. But there's a key difference: AI model pricing is dropping 50-200x per year and the provider landscape shifts every few months.
When your cost base is that volatile, bundling it creates problems:
- You can't pass savings to customers as models get cheaper
- You can't let customers bring their own API keys (which they increasingly want)
- You can't give enterprises the compliance visibility they'll legally need by August 2026
The question every AI builder should ask: what is my product worth independent of the model running underneath it?
If the answer is clear, decouple the burn and prove it.
https://t.co/f8yV6w16nc
The Joel Test turned 26, @spolsky.
Source control? That's oxygen now. Daily builds? Elite teams deploy hourly.
Here's the 2026 version—12 new questions for modern engineering teams.
https://t.co/LQsPtgplpd
I usually refresh my workspace every February, but this year I moved the upgrade forward to November. A cleaner desk, better setup, and a more organized reading corner.
As always, my junior auditor stopped by for a quick quality check. 💛📚