I'm curious about that too.

I'm building a language with AI, and when I leave the AI running on its own, it keeps generating code in strange directions. I wonder what kind of structure AI-only code would have.

Why just the commercial ones !??

I'm experimenting with large-ish software projects using Claude Fable. The results are surprising to me.

- Project portfolio management software. Good results so far. This is unsupervised experimentation: Fable researches feature ideas and plans them, then Opus 5 implements them in a loop. The features include things such as an auth server, full-text search, audit logging, resource leveling, HA/DR, IaC, and more.

- FHIR & SNOMED medical software experimentation in demo-only environments. This has mixed results so far. This is supervised experimentation: the FHIR specifications and SNOMED specifications are thorough and I'm in the loop. Fable plans OK, but Opus 5 is thrashing quite a lot, going down many rabbit holes.

Running a Loop on the well defined goal seems promising: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EtxdB7gpFqY

I have been using Claude to build a clone of Bash in Rust (https://github.com/jdstanhope/huck). It has been goin going on now for 81 days, 2600 commits and I have covered a good chunk of the features such that I can source by .bashrc with a number of extensions. It has been doing pretty good but it will sometimes spend hours to do few line fix and other times pushback on making big changes despite have over 3000 tests.

That being said, I am still guiding it on a regular basis and only recently let it run open ended trying fixing small to medium size bugs. The next stage will be try let it run in a loop trying to fix the 100 issues it has identified as well as getting most of the bash test suite to pass.

I believe they can make ANY software project the largest it can be!

This solution should look for more problems.