How I write software with LLMs
indigodaddy
69 points
16 comments
March 16, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 44.7ms across 3,471 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- I don't use LLMs for programming ms7892 · 68 pts · March 12, 2026 · 74% similar
- Reliable Software in the LLM Era mempirate · 102 pts · March 12, 2026 · 65% similar
- LLMs learn what programmers create, not how programmers work noemit · 25 pts · March 23, 2026 · 61% similar
- LLMs work best when the user defines their acceptance criteria first dnw · 137 pts · March 07, 2026 · 59% similar
- Things I Think I Think... Preferring Local OSS LLMs zdw · 43 pts · April 02, 2026 · 59% similar
Discussion Highlights (4 comments)
christofosho
I like reading these types of breakdowns. Really gives you ideas and insight into how others are approaching development with agents. I'm surprised the author hasn't broken down the developer agent persona into smaller subagents. There is a lot of context used when your agent needs to write in a larger breadth of code areas (i.e. database queries, tests, business logic, infrastructure, the general code skeleton). I've also read[1] that having a researcher and then a planner helps with context management in the pre-dev stage as well. I like his use of multiple reviewers, and am similarly surprised that they aren't refined into specialized roles. I'll admit to being a "one prompt to rule them all" developer, and will not let a chat go longer than the first input I give. If mistakes are made, I fix the system prompt or the input prompt and try again. And I make sure the work is broken down as much as possible. That means taking the time to do some discovery before I hit send. Is anyone else using many smaller specific agents? What types of patterns are you employing? TIA 1. https://github.com/humanlayer/advanced-context-engineering-f...
indigodaddy
This was on the front page and then got completely buried for some reason. Super weird.
plastic041
I wanted to know how to make softwares with LLM "without losing the benefit of knowing how the entire system works" and "intimately familiar with each project’s architecture and inner workings", while "have never even read most of their code". But OP didn't explain that. You tell LLM to create something, and then use another LLM to review it. It might make the result safer, but it doesn't mean that YOU understand the architecture. No one does.
silisili
I'm not sure the notion I keep seeing of "it's ok, we still architect, it just writes the code"(paraphrased) sits well with me. I've not tested it with architecting a full system, but assuming it isn't good at it today... it's only a matter of time. Then what is our use?