The AI started actively breaking working code after I hit the limit. Repeated errors, no learning, and corrupted scripts. It destroyed bots I had already built.
Anyone else feel this service is more hype than functionality?
The AI started actively breaking working code after I hit the limit. Repeated errors, no learning, and corrupted scripts. It destroyed bots I had already built.
Anyone else feel this service is more hype than functionality?
They lack ToC, fast search, fuzzy searches, stem searches... really anything we've known to do with searches for the last 30 years. We're largely restricted to linear grepping and scanning.
GNU tried to make `info` happen, but it never caught on.
---
But the real problem with regexes is they force you mentally evaluate and skip over irrelevant hits, because it's not the right tool for excluding them.
Since regexes don't understand doc structure, you can't prioritize for a section heading with a word over other instances of the word.
Likewise for fuzzy search for longer phrases or cases where you're not sure of the precise order of multiple words.
They also lack stemming, so you either spend time constructing flexible regexes to handle related variants, or you run multiple searches with similar words.
Etc etc etc.
This is why text search engines are much more sophisticated than plain regexes.
---
Here's an example I ran into regularly when I was building a copy of bash's bind command:
How many irrelevant hits do you have to skip over to look up the the CLI options for bash's bind builtin? There's hits for the letters "bind" all over the manpage. And unfortunately the builtin options are near the end. I finally hit upon using "G" in less to jump to the end of the manpage, and then doing a reverse search for the hyper-specific phrase "BUILTINS", which takes me close to the right spot, but I only realized that after doing it a few times.
Also man has "apropos" for search. It works pretty well IME.
`apropos` is for listing possibly relevant manpages, but I'm thinking about searching within a manpage. Particularly a long one like bash's.
While you laboriously hunt for all the correct options, I've gone to lunch.
I doubt anyone's using AI for "ls" unless they're just starting to learn the terminal.
ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -ss 20 -map 0 -c:v libaom-av1 -b:v 1M -c:a libopus -map -0:s -y output.mp4
I'm kind of surprised it got this many things wrong to be honest.
I have no idea what prompt you fed it, but at least personally, I rarely get such poor results for ffmpeg.
But assuming I got this back, instead of running it blind, I wold check the options it suggested, find the flaws, fix them and then run it. Quite possibly still faster than it would take to construct by hand from scratch.
In that sense, LLMs are better search engines than existing search engines in terms of guiding you to the right neighborhood, if not the correct house.
---
When people criticize YOLO vibe coding, I think they're forgetting all the ways LLMs can still be very useful with a human in the loop.
But again, my question stands: why would I need an AI in my terminal?
My only objection to AI in the terminal is it's one more subscription to track. But otherwise, I have no issue with AI chats in everything.
I mean, Warp is still a terminal at the end of the day. Nothing's forcing me to use AI, it's just handy for the occasional command. I use it sporadically enough that I never even leave the free tier.
I think OP made the mistake of trying to use the Warp model for coding; I wouldn't let anything less than a frontier model touch code.
But that's not exactly what i was asking about lol
I used it before as a free Claude Code to do ad-hoc scripting, pretty useful. Now I have found a bunch of TUI programs (Amazon Q, rovo dev, opencode) that can assist with that kind of workflow. I don't like that it's a GUI app, but I like the fact that it's a terminal app where I can type command directly into, not just prompt. Claude 4 should be fine, was on free, never hit limit so not sure what's the lite experience is.
It feels analogous to what would happen if you put me in front of a broken project without source control that I've never seen before and asked me to fix it without giving me enough time to actually understand it. It starts from errors and bugs, guesses corresponding source code, and tries to narrowly fix just that snippet. Generally it favors deleting, but not specifically deleting new code.
I would have thought it could record a log of its actions and use that log to think about undoing. I would also think it could annotate lines with git blame so it knows undoing wouldn't involve changing anything more than say a day old. Unfortunately that isn't consistent with what I've seen.
I just make a WIP git commit and run git commit -A --amend --no-edit after manually reviewing each unit of work.
Edit: I also wish Claude implemented undo at a higher level instead of relying on the model. Some combination of snapshotting the whole repo and tracking operations that have precise inverses. But I understand that would have drawbacks.
https://aider.chat/docs/usage/watch.html I'm trying https://openrouter.ai/qwen/qwen3-235b-a22b-2507
Claude code, for example, sometimes is incredibly useful in generating repeatable patterns, and sometimes it just walks in circles. But at least I always understand what's it's doing, can revert and tell it to do differently.
[1]: https://wezterm.org/
radkiddo•1d ago