I still am mind blown at how bad CC is as software. It’s just not that hard of a problem. I get that harnesses aren’t trivial, but they’re not insane either. And the fact that it’s running on a JS runtime (that they bought!) is also crazy. Why not Go/BubbleTea? Why not literally anything native? It makes no sense
I don’t want to be a jackass, but it’s hard to take anything Boris says seriously when he’s headed up such weird software. And it’s not like resourcing or money is an issue for them. If Claude was so damn good, why does CC suck?
Those numbers don't really mean anything. Claude Code has millions of users, and that issue forum is the most obvious place for them to ask questions or request features.
If there were 11,000 open and confirmed bugs then yeah, that would mean the software is bad.
Curl is great, but I think you're vastly underestimating the surface area of CC.
It looks like it has more in: editor integrations, multiple guis and tuis, config variations, external systems (eg, git, mcps, curl-like requests?), statefulness (curl is "only" request response), inner runtimes (eg, sandbox per OS), sensitivity to its environment, possible side effects of its own execution, potential interaction combinations, etc.
Curl has hard system-level code requirements but it's design space feels more bounded and predictable to me.
> I think you're vastly underestimating the surface area of CC.
That is one of the reasons CC code is so low quality. The amount of extra unnecessary code just to implement it using React is by far the worst technical slop decision I've seen made by so called "software engineers" in a long time.
weakfish · · focus · HN ↗
I don’t want to be a jackass, but it’s hard to take anything Boris says seriously when he’s headed up such weird software. And it’s not like resourcing or money is an issue for them. If Claude was so damn good, why does CC suck?
simonw · · focus · HN ↗
Seems pretty good to me. Presumably this is about the TUI version?
metaltyphoon · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues
simonw · · focus · HN ↗
If there were 11,000 open and confirmed bugs then yeah, that would mean the software is bad.
metaltyphoon · · focus · HN ↗
IMO this is very dismissive. One example of probably many more, where software is used by millions and yet doesn't have this much being reported.
<a href="https://github.com/curl/curl/issues" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/curl/curl/issues
simonw · · focus · HN ↗
slopinthebag · · focus · HN ↗
usef- · · focus · HN ↗
It looks like it has more in: editor integrations, multiple guis and tuis, config variations, external systems (eg, git, mcps, curl-like requests?), statefulness (curl is "only" request response), inner runtimes (eg, sandbox per OS), sensitivity to its environment, possible side effects of its own execution, potential interaction combinations, etc.
Curl has hard system-level code requirements but it's design space feels more bounded and predictable to me.
This of course isn't an excuse for all bugs.
brazukadev · · focus · HN ↗
That is one of the reasons CC code is so low quality. The amount of extra unnecessary code just to implement it using React is by far the worst technical slop decision I've seen made by so called "software engineers" in a long time.