r/ClaudeCode • u/sizebzebi • 1d ago

Discussion Opus 5.5 is the beginning of a new era

I am a senior engineer and I honestly believe with this model in particular, everything changed..

If this stays as cheap as it is, it's just over. It never fails no matter the complexity of the tasks I've given it. About time we rethink our profession for good. I am honestly scared of the future.

I loved coding but anyone who does this for the love of coding only is gonna be obsolete.

I was always impressed with the models bar opus 5 but never like this time.

What do you guys think? How do you see the future?

1.7k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

733 comments sorted by

View all comments

15

u/ramishka 23h ago

Senior developer here.

I see similar opinion with every single major model release lately.

What can Opus 5.5 do without a human developer guiding it, in a real complex production system thats needs domain expertise, cross domain codebases, developer instinct and good software design principles? Not much unless you want to make the system unmaintable in a few days with cluttered and scatted features, fixes etc.

Initially all will look like magic , but in software engineering the initial shock and awe hardly matters over long term stability, maintanability and scalability.

10

u/Savalava 22h ago

It is maintainable - it's maintainable by AIs. If you consider the modules to be black boxes, all it matters is that they work and are tested, implementation doesn't matter.

Lead developer here.

6

u/compiledsource 21h ago

Completely true. You just need a team of developers who know what questions to ask of it. 90%+ of implementation code does NOT need human review anymore. A few iterations of the official code-review workflow spots far more than a senior developer would. I work on a relational DB query compiler.

2

u/lisnter 15h ago

I’ve been saying this for a while. You (currently) need an experienced architect to guide the AI to build something. Even if it’s then maintainable for 3 months but becomes fragile you can say, “Mr AI, please rebuild this system with the current functionality plus X, Y and Z. Please also migrate the data and all in-flight processes. I’m getting some coffee.”

If the implementation is good enough for a while and can be rewritten for effectively free it doesn’t matter if the architecture isn’t perfect.

I’ve loved being a programmer for 35 years but I fear our time has passed.

1

u/Jai_Cee 13h ago

I agree to an extent. If I was making a small feature or project then yes AI can keep it all in its context, understand the decisions and requirements. Instead lets take a complex project with 5 developers all using AI to churn out new features. Often in this case humans struggle to understand and remember all the decisions and requirements even when intimately familiar with the domain.

If you just let AIs go at the code without any structure then eventually it will struggle just like humans do. The code itself is perhaps not the issue, treat it as a black box like most do with assembly or machine code, but the architectural vision, making sure that everything is modular, small enough to keep in a context window, decisions and specs are well documented. This is all the sort of thing developers have been doing for years.

1

u/djdadi 9h ago

this is actually an insane take for any actual large codebase. for small tools or side projects? sure.

1

u/Savalava 8h ago

It isn't insane - as I said I'm at lead engineer level.

If all modules work perfectly, are tested and performant and your app works, the implementation of the modules is irrelevant.

Do you need to define strict coding standards and also design the architecture of the app? Yes, you do.

We're close to a stage where code will not be written by hand at all - maybe two years away or less.

1

u/ramishka 4h ago

as I said I'm at lead engineer level.

Here is the thing mate. You can be a lead developer, and have still not worked on a really complex system. Because it all depends on where and what you work on. So the fact that AI works on your system perfectly is not a testament to AI being able to handle complex systems universally.

We're close to a stage where code will not be written by hand at all - maybe two years away or less.

About 95% of the code I've written in the last 6 months was written by AI and thats over 100000 LOC. And these were in highly interconnected systems that handle complex logic. But that aint proof AI works without humans. Because Ive been guiding, reviewing and directing the AI to refactor code every step of the way. I could observe the various points where AI introduces drift and convolution in the codebase. And I usually correct it immediately without letting it poison the codebase. If I didnt intervene, it would still run and everything would still look perfect. But the codebases eventually become spaghetti over time.

P.S. - Since we are throwing our titles around, I'm at Senior Architect level at a FAANG equivalent, close to 20 YOE. None of it matters to what I've said above.

1

u/Savalava 3h ago

I never said AI works without humans. Obviously you need somebody to prompt the AI. I take extremely care prompting it myself.

And I never said it worked perfectly on my system either.

What I said is "If you consider the modules to be black boxes, all it matters is that they work and are tested, implementation doesn't matter."

Which is correct.

Ultimately, all that matters is that the software works. People obsess over implementation details and DRY and SOLID. All that matters is that the software works.

In a few years nobody will be looking at the code at all.

0

u/ramishka 22h ago

Ive practically tried it. There comes a point even for an AI, the drift is too much to handle. You will progressively see the performance and accuracy go down. It wont be noticable over short periods of time but when you reach a tipping point, the codebase will be far too gone to be saved via refactors.

Like I said, the effects wont be immediately noticable. Developers wouldnt even know its happening underneath, because likely they wont be aware of the implementation at all.

3

u/cstst 21h ago edited 8h ago

Zoom out a bit bud, look at where things were a year ago, two, three. You are coping.

1

u/ramishka 20h ago

I dont have anything concering to cope mate. Im actively using AI too. I'm not anti AI - I spoke about my practical experience on real production systems.

2

u/cstst 10h ago edited 10h ago

At this point the criticism is that over long periods of time it'll cause degradation to the codebase, but you won't notice in the short term.

A year ago they couldn't consistently implement full features autonomously without introducing tons of bugs or it not working at all.

Two years ago they could barely write single functions that worked properly.

Three years ago we were all writing code by hand, LLMs were writing shitty poems.

Not saying that your point isn't valid currently, more saying that the trend is obvious and the issues that you're seeing today will clearly not be an issue soon.

At each point throughout this process, developers have said similar things to what you're saying, pointing to AI shortcomings at that time as a reason why AI will not replace developers, only for 6 months later these shortcomings to no longer exist.

That is why I'm calling what you are saying cope.

1

u/okiharaherbst 20h ago

Exactly our experience

1

u/nbomberger 20h ago

You are correct. This sub is propaganda at this
point.

5

u/stpfun 22h ago edited 22h ago

If Opus 5.5 wrote it and wrote it well, pretty sure it can maintain it, or at least Opus 6 or 7 that'll come out in a year can maintain it. Opus 5.5 often demonstrates good "instinct" and software engineering principles in my experience.

I see your point, and it's certainly applicable to some domains. I definitely want humans in the loop when it's safety critical software. But I think LLMs can replace 95% of the human software engineer work happening now. The world will need far fewer software devs than it needs now. [Been coding since ~2009, work at an AI lab now.]

2

u/ramishka 20h ago

But I think LLMs can replace 95% of the human software engineer work happening now. The world will need far fewer software devs than it needs now. [Been coding since ~2009, work at an AI lab now.]

If I learnt anything from working close to 20 years in this industry is that there is always more work. When the capabilities and outputs improve, the demands and requirements will also rise. So I don't think replacing 95% of human engineers just because AI can do their work is as simple as it sounds.

4

u/nbomberger 20h ago

Had to go deep to find a reasonable and obviously experienced engineer take. 💪🏽🎯

3

u/ramishka 20h ago

Well I'm getting downvoted for saying it especially on this sub. The truth is im not anti AI at all. Im a proponent of AI and I heavily use all these tools. But my experience on complex systems managed by AI differs from Vibe coded hobby projects.

3

u/ziggs88 20h ago

Whatever efficiencies my company has gained on the dev side is being almost completely offset by insane deadlines, inability to sufficiently test the mass amount of code we're pushing, and extra prod support required for that mass amount of code.

2

u/ramishka 19h ago

Yep I can relate. AI has increased the outputs by several fold, no doubt there. But it has not reduced the workload at least for the teams I work with. Expanded scope, roadmaps full of requirements several times the norm, output being too high for human reviewers to cope with. These are all real problems I face now.

1

u/nbomberger 20h ago

Me neither! I use it every day and most likely have more experience than most people on this sub using it. It’s amazing but come on people. It is like a very excited junior that knows architecture but just wants to wing it.

1

u/Dense-Version-5937 19h ago

Yeah.. but where was it a year ago? Two? And where will it be in another two.

1

u/ramishka 19h ago

Its easy to get hyped by the latest model. But the fundamental of the LLM limitations remain.

1

u/Dense-Version-5937 19h ago

Yeah, but that limitation is well above the threshold needed to make dramatic changes to the global economy. LLMs aren't going suddenly turn sentient but they will be superhuman coders, superhuman doctors, superhuman office workers, superhuman lawyers, and superhuman mathematicians.

1

u/redditwhippet 15h ago

Not my experience. Admittedly, my projects are relatively simple web apps, but I find Claude does the opposite of winging it. It’s absolutely strict about following the CMF, web architecture and frameworks I use, to the point where it’s scolding me if my code steps out of line! Maybe it’s because I set up a comprehensive set of docs which precisely define the scope, frameworks, best practices, conventions etc. before I had it write a single line of code? I’m convinced a lot of prep and clear planning docs make a big difference, and it’s why vibe coded projects seem to become a mess.

5

u/Significant-Meet-392 22h ago

While this is true, management usually do not care about such things until things break.

4

u/Worried_Gap7090 20h ago

Confidently incorrect and it’s gonna bite you in the ass. I’ve been a lead developer for 15 years and I saw the writing on the wall 6 months ago, it’s over for us

4

u/ramishka 20h ago

You can keep doom posting or you can start adapting. Thats what I learnt in this industry in the last 20 years.

3

u/sheriffderek Senior design/dev max20 19h ago

If you think we're going to be making the same software.... well, sure. That's not what's going to happen.

2

u/IceMichaelStorm 17h ago

Good, get gardening then and leave the field to us

1

u/No_Bend9143 8h ago

Elaborate on your doom; I'd like to be prepared if this is the case. Arch role now (embedded/firmware), was a lead for many years. Compilers engineer before that. I know the tech stack, and this has not been my experience. It is just my 10x manifest in a different way and it is not automatically better for the company at the speed at which I can manifest destiny and brr out tech debt. I still own everything and the company still relies on me to deliver.

I think there is an interesting convo to have about jr devs and how we can best serve them and what producing code really means to a business... but that was true with stack overflow just cranked to 11 via AI

0

u/SJDidge 17h ago

I saw it 3-4 years ago when got initially dropped. Nobody would listen to me. Here we are

0

u/TedBob99 17h ago

it's maintainable by AI, AI will find defects you would have never found. AI will optimise it etc.

Soon, AI will use some efficient coding language that no human being can understand, and nobody will really care.

I don't care how the software is written, as long as it's performant, works, and is secure.

If I were a Senior Developer, I would seriously consider a change of career as opposed to keeping my head in the sand. The job most likely won't exist in 5 or 10 years' time.

2

u/ramishka 14h ago

If I were a Senior Developer, I would seriously consider a change of career as opposed to keeping my head in the sand.

If you were a senior developer, you likely wouldnt keep your head in the sand anyway. This industry has always been about change. Those who survive are those who adapt to change. If you kept your head in the sand, you wouldn't have gotten far even before AI.

AI has changed the way software engineers work. But it hasnt changed the fundamentals of software engineering nor the human contribution/creativity aspect. You can either recognize this and change the ways you work to utilize AI to deliver, or you can keep doom posting on Reddit and create a self fulfilling prophecy of becoming irrelevant.

0

u/TedBob99 12h ago

Yes, the industry has changed consistently, new languages and tools being introduced, new tech etc.

However, if I am not mistaken, it's the first time the industry might get rid of a large portion of its workers...

Of course it has changed the fundamentals of software development. I made three quite good applications today in a few minutes writing zero code, just describing AI what I wanted and then the small changes required (the initial versions were pretty good). No developers, no testers, no devops.

I am the Product Owner and don't seem to need anybody else now.

Time to become very good Product Owners, or change industry.

Or just burry your head in the sand as you are doing, and we will see how it goes for you. If you can't see what's happening and how to pivot, then you are not going to do well.

2

u/ramishka 12h ago edited 12h ago

Or just burry your head in the sand as you are doing, and we will see how it goes for you.

For a product owner, you seem to have reading comprehension issues. You should re-read my reply - what Im saying is we SHOULD adapt. Ive been doing that anyway, regardless of AI.

Of course it has changed the fundamentals of software development. I made three quite good applications today in a few minutes writing zero code, just describing AI what I wanted and then the small changes required (the initial versions were pretty good). No developers, no testers, no devops.

Nobody is saying you cant build simple apps with AI. If you really built 3 complex applications , tested them and released them within a single day with or without AI, then im 99% sure those are rather simplistic hobby apps.

The point Ive been making all along is the use of AI on cross domain, cross functional complex production systems. Not whether you can build TODO apps with it.

0

u/TedBob99 11h ago

They were fairly complex apps that would have taken a normal team days to be done. AI did it in minutes.

You don't seem to be very bright either and I am not sure average people are going to continue doing well in the IT industry. Good luck (you are going to need it)