6/3/2026 at 11:44:13 PM
It's not particularly revelatory to point out that this project has been generated largely by LLM (claude most likely, given the CLAUDE.md in the repo).Also looks like a bit of introspection has happened ... https://github.com/duanebester/gooey/blob/main/docs/architec...
I wonder if this is just what we get now: low quality code, expressed rapidly. We are excited by the promise only to be disappointed by the reality of the implementation.
There are still a few new things around that are carefully and thoughtfully developed and put out into the world. zig itself. MitchellH's ghostty. And there's still all the older foundations of really wonderful, robust, software created by people like Linus Torvalds and couple of generations of open source devs, that applied great skill, ingenuity and hard work to produce the very best software.
But I fear that I'm in for a period of lamentation as we get wave after wave of promising sounding developments, but where the reality is low quality, LLM generated crap that you really shouldn't use if you want secure, stable performant, production-ready software.
Seems like perhaps we've been through a golden age of really great software and that now it's coming to a close.
(edited to fix spelling)
by henry_bone
6/4/2026 at 1:14:12 AM
We're in the messy transition period where our old indicators of a promising GitHub project are too easily replicated by someone letting Claude Code run for a few days.A year ago it would have taken someone months of nights and weekends effort to get this much code up and running. That person would have developed a good intuition for the architecture and where it should go.
Now Codex or Claude can bang it out in a couple days. You can try to have it do spec documents, code reviews, and cleanup passes but with today's tools these projects reach a point where it's just a swirling mess of pieces duct taped together in a way that passes tests. In my experiments, you quickly reach a point where the usable context depth (which is less than the 1M limits) keeps overflowing before you can get usable refactors in, and you're just going in circles. I know it's theoretically possible to avoid these problems, but in practice you get spaghetti projects like this.
by Aurornis
6/4/2026 at 7:16:40 AM
I don’t know, GPT-5.5 has been very effective for me. It’s not perfect but the quality of refactoring it can do is awesome.Previous models both GPT and Claude would struggle with the larger picture more. Pretty quickly they’d do one off hacks. Eventually they’d code themselves into a wall if you weren’t careful.
Haven’t hit that wall with GPT-5.5 yet. New changes or improvements on a GUI library I’m building seem to be constant in time per feature.
Though I’m talking only 10k’s of LOC. Also I’m using Nim which is both strongly typed and concise.
by elcritch
6/4/2026 at 1:56:46 PM
> Haven’t hit that wall with GPT-5.5I’m seeing a similar improvement with Opus 4.8, which is acting like an engineer that cares about correctness. The harder the problem the better it seems to do.
I think a golden age of software is just starting for indie software. It’s just going to take a while to see the first really good results.
by willtemperley
6/4/2026 at 11:04:23 AM
This is what people say after every new model is released though.by SkiFire13
6/4/2026 at 11:45:14 AM
You have to drink the koolaid if you want to keep tokenmaxxingby reactordev
6/4/2026 at 8:20:41 PM
Who cares about tokens?I'm wanting to build pieces of software that I've been wanting and often working on for years. These new models are making it possible for me to scale my work to build it.
by elcritch
6/4/2026 at 1:25:06 PM
Funny you mention ghostty since they use a lot of AI, but they review and make sure they understand every line.There should be some way to measure (and display) how much of a project is understood by the humans behind it.
by hiccuphippo
6/4/2026 at 11:10:16 PM
Yeah, I'm aware. MitchellH posts about it quite a bit, most recently about AI "psychosis". Also, much of ghostty was created without the use of AI, I think. More recently, they've been using it to find bugs, improve performance, and generally refine and enhance ghostty and libghostty.The LLM is the finishing tool, not the architect or core developer.
by henry_bone
6/4/2026 at 9:24:12 PM
That plan smells AI generated:> Gooey is in better shape than most ~140 KLOC Zig codebases — every directory has a mod.zig, namespaces are layered, and core/interface_verify.zig provides compile-time platform-backend checks. But the architecture has drifted in a few
I too have used AI to plan cleaning up its own mess, and this self-congratulatory prose is extremely consistent ("every directory has a mod.zig", whoop dee woo!).
In my experience, AI is largely incapable of fixing its own mess to an actually competent degree (and full disclosure: I still ask it to, not pointing fingers here) and it's probably due to it walking on egg shells around its own feelings. I've had to tell it to completely change course during cleanup at least 30 times this week.
Also: https://xcancel.com/mitchellh/status/2060088112257372610
by zamalek
6/4/2026 at 1:04:12 AM
To be fair, "excited by the promise only to be disappointed by the reality of the implementation" describes ~95% of my experiences with all software over the last 20 years. In fact only a few exceptions really come to mind - git, treesitter, ffmpeg, and sqlite.by danielvaughn
6/4/2026 at 1:56:07 AM
Yeah, maybe it's rose coloured glasses on my behalf. Those examples you mentioned, I would 100% agree with. It's some of the best software out there. And yeah, there's probably always been rubbish about.I guess I hope that the good stuff keeps coming and the dross falls away. More signal, less noise.
by henry_bone
6/4/2026 at 2:14:58 AM
I do agree with you though. It feels like the industry has steadily been getting worse, AI is just like pouring kerosine on the fire. I'm almost embarrassed to call myself a software engineer now.On a small bright note, I've gotten AI to help me produce some of my best work over the last couple of months. It may enable sloppy behavior, but it doesn't require it. I have hope that serious work will win out in the end, and that sheer human effort is still the differentiator.
by danielvaughn
6/4/2026 at 5:03:56 AM
Yeah, there was a good article on here the other day where the author suggested going slower with AI and using it to help produce higher quality output. I think the idea is to be quite "hands on", coding much in the old way, but to use AI to help with, for example, test coverage, error mode detection and handling, refinement of the solution/feature, etc.At least that's how I read it. :-) I'm learning that there's a place for the LLM but it's the sandpaper, not the chisel.
by henry_bone
6/4/2026 at 5:30:53 AM
Hah, that describes my relationship with git itself, actually.by Pxtl
6/4/2026 at 2:21:49 PM
lol I'm more speaking to reliability than the quality of the interface. git and ffmpeg are not exactly known for the most intuitive API surface, but I don't think I've ever encountered a bug with them in my 17 years. That's a pretty extraordinary thing when you think about it.by danielvaughn
6/4/2026 at 2:36:32 PM
Fair point. My problem with git is actually mostly the flaw in the object model itself, more than the dismal API. The fundamental mismatch between "to get a clean history you have to edit/destroy history with squashes and rebases and whatnot" and "editing history destroys the ability to do comparisons of two branches, which basically ruins half of git's functionality from top to bottom when you encounter that problem".Like even the basic question of "hey did I already merge this branch?" becoming unknowable if you autosquash-on-merge is just nasty.
I've got a million ideas on what the "correct" fix for that problem might be, but imho it's a flaw deep in the heart of git that creates a massive amount of pain.
But I'll give it credit for being rock solid and blazing fast, as you say.
by Pxtl
6/4/2026 at 9:26:06 AM
I find it quite dishonest as github stars used to be (and maybe still are?) the measure of an open source project popularity, and these big, flashy LLM generated repos seem to always get a bit of attentionHave seen it from jobseekers trying to boost their profile with fake projects, founders trying to make their product more attractive to VCs, consultants trying to advertise their services...
I don't always have time for OSS, but every PR I've ever sent has always been hand written, and tested, and has taken into consideration the project coding style and architecture choices – I don't like this new world where developers can't even be bothered to write the docs.
by mpeg
6/4/2026 at 3:44:47 AM
Have you found evidence that the code is actually low-quality, or is that just an assumption based on the fact that it's evidently largely LLM-generated?by mwcampbell
6/4/2026 at 3:53:59 AM
You should read the link they provided which goes into detail on the architectural shortfalls of Gooey due to an accelerated development.by lelandbatey
6/4/2026 at 6:08:38 AM
Tbh, the link itself sounds like LLM as well, spotted a few emojis in there. I suppose I could be wrong, but I feel like we're all getting good at sniffing generated language.by dimator
6/4/2026 at 7:04:28 AM
it is.by zipy124
6/4/2026 at 11:38:43 AM
You don't think people have anything to do with the poor implementation? The Golden Age of software already happened? Uh huh, right. This comment reminds me of how people used to speak of Geocities and the early Internet.by Ajakks