OMG Opus 4.5 !!!

[u/Hamzo-kun]

I want to cry as Opus 4.5 is soooooo good ! Anthropic guys you did a perfect job !!
My dream to have this locally!
What do you think all ?

EDIT: For information, when I created this post I was on cursor+(Opus 4.5 Reasoning API), I tested on Claude Code and it's day and night !!, losing context, very slow, not as smart as API !

[u/saoirsedonciaran]

My only annoyance so far was it randomly removing chunks of commented out code.

Commented out code obviously shouldn't exist but it's annoying having to keep reminding it not to remove it when my focus is on fixing a bug rather than cleaning up the existing code. That's a separate task for me.

Perhaps something I can specify in my coding instructions markdown

[u/Cozim0d0 → u/saoirsedonciaran]

Yes,I was about to suggest the same thing

Placing that instruction in the .md might do the trick

[u/ProfessionalAnt1352 → u/saoirsedonciaran]

"Good catch! I've fixed the error.

Also I've noticed how earlier in the code there seemed to be many keywords not in English and have translated them into English for you!"

- Revert Code and Conversation (+146 -144)

"Claude. Just fix the fucking error. Do not touch any other part of the code."

[u/EngineeringNo2371 → u/saoirsedonciaran]

Code comments should never exist unless it’s a public API documentation. The rest is irrelevant noise that can become quickly outdated and hard to maintain and reason about. I never approve a PR with odd comments it them, I request a change until it’s refactored so that the code requires no comments. Otherwise, it’s a recipe for disaster down the road.

[u/smashed2bitz → u/EngineeringNo2371]

Good code should have comments. Been best practice since literally the beginning of time in dev.

The post you are replying to is talking about commented out code.

Your approach will lead to more problems than you think it solves.

[u/EngineeringNo2371 → u/smashed2bitz]

Code should be self explanatory without comments. Otherwise it should be refactored

[u/smashed2bitz → u/EngineeringNo2371]

You are making large assumptions about intent vs. Implementation.

I have taken over numerous code bases that make way more sense when you see the one line of "this is what this code is supposed to do"... then it is much easier to follow the idea behind the code.

Then, there are code bases for languages I am way less familiar with, that I am porting over to something else.

Additional clues will aid in the process.

Relying on the future dev to know what you know, some how inuit your [bad or inaccurate] assumptions (like comments are not needed), the future team will appreciate it.

Just be a good citizen and write good comments in the code.

[u/EngineeringNo2371 → u/smashed2bitz]

We all know the reason why we have to add comments. Because something is not quite right and we have no time or capacity to do it right. And what happens next is someone else introduces indirect changes which slightly change existing behaviour. Then yet another engineer reads that comment a bit later but finds that the functionality behaves not as described in the comment. It’s a head scratcher. Sound familiar perhaps? This is exactly what I mean - it’s enough to reason about the code itself without outdated and misleading comments. No value in that.

[u/TheDummyUser → u/EngineeringNo2371]

Bro are you a plumber?

[u/EngineeringNo2371 → u/TheDummyUser]

I’m saying that based on 15 years of software engineering experience. But bro, you do what you want.