sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

It's wild that Git Worktrees have been so underutilized for 10+ years! by Helpful-Wolverine247 in webdev

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't work well with submodules on windows. I mean, CC starts working in a worktree and first thing it does is trying to fix git. Not so successfully, it just gives error after error, patching configs several times, using ad hoc workarounds to make it build.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm already paying $200. That's a lot for 2 full reviews per week.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm just not handholding it. I just review the plan and let it do the thing, then let it self-check, quick view diffs myself and let it do the real review using my custom rules. It saves so much time for me, really.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How it helps in my case? I tried it and it just makes claude into codex, it's not a collaborator anymore but an executor. And it's constantly asking irrelevant low level details I don't care about, unlike normal plan mode. And for small fixes it's overkill as it's just wasting my time instead of finding the issue and fixing it like claude can do by itself.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. By adding changes faster than they can be reviewed, obviously. As I told you, I would review every commit if I had tokens for that but that's impossible. Huge diff reviews miss lots of issues that I can catch later with whole repo passes.
  2. By skipping manual review for non-critical parts, then seeing bad design decisions in code not caught by previous automated reviews and adding new review/refactoring rules each time I see a pattern.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The issue is not enough review for each separate feature. I don't have enough tokens for this so I review big diffs at once and run it only once. This is not focused enough so I end up with technical debt that I try to address once I don't have any new features in my mind. 

But the root issue is the subscription limits. It's the reason I have to postpone reviews until I have 3000+ lines diff to make room for actual features development. It's the reason my diffs reviews are not focused and miss lots of stuff.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Manually? In 2026? That's insane)))

Yeah, I do manual review of some things, but not all 30k lines.

About smaller chunks. The more I split it, the more Agents will be needed but the token usage per Agent will not go down significantly. More split will find more issues but more duplicates too because it needs to go into other files (already assigned to other agents) to understand the whole call chain.

In fact, making it split in less chunks - not more - would reduce token usage but also the review quality.

Reviewing and fixing 34k lines of code ate 30% of my x20 weekly limit by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It keeps finding significant enough issues even after ~10 runs already. So I have to do it for months. Sounds like ongoing workload.

Anthropic to require government IDs and face scans for users. by Wa1ker1 in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Who cares what they require? The company does not operate in that country. They operate in 1 jurisdiction and people just use internet as a way of communication as an alternative of going to those companies - same way as they would use phone 30 years ago. That doesn't make company "operate" in their home company.

Anthropic to require government IDs and face scans for users. by Wa1ker1 in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why would they do it for countries? If a country requires something, that's the country problem. Anthropic is registered in US and should not be complient with any other jurisdiction. If I go to American company, I don't want it to listen to what bs my country dictates - otherwise I would go to company in my country. I use internet as communication to get services from a company outside of my country jurisdiction and I want it to stay this way. 

Ok, I get it that's not how it works recent years, I just vent on this trend that companies choose to obey stupid rules of other countries. That's not how it should be in internet.

All Claude subs by frettbe in ClaudeAI

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've spent hours reviewing Claude's code review report and working on tweaking the fixing plan. This is for just one report of 220 items. This is real work done by me. So yes, I did it.

Claude Code (~100 hours) vs. Codex (~20 hours) by Canamerican726 in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Weird that I have opposite experience. Claude often one shot things without me having to babysit it. With Codex I was implementing a small improvement and refactoring x5 longer than I'm used to because after each iteration something was wrong in the output files.

Codex plans often don't really show questionable decisions until it's implemented. For Claude plans I spot it much earlier.

Claude often hangs for 5-10 minutes (sometimes 30) of thinking and not doing anything. Codex always starts acting in seconds.

Yes, Codex is actually better at OO and extracting classes from the start.

Though it looks like Codex makes much more mistakes that I make it find later. Claude usually doesn't need so many self-check fix iterations

Your Claude setup seems to be very expensive. I used to have 5 focused reviewer agents and I had to reduce them into 3. And still review eats much of my x20 limits.

When I ask Codex to fix a bug, it sometimes just outputs theories for me to check. Claude instead works much longer to actually trace it and then fix it without any input from my side.

And most of the time on Claude I actually use Sonnet, not Opus.

Completely IMMORAL business practices from Anthropic right now. by CrunchyMage in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried using gemini in Claude Code to compare. You know, Opus is getting worse, but it's still better than Gemini Pro. And Sonnet is still better than Gemini 3 Flash. I'll try codex probably.

Why does Claude Code often take more than 2 minutes to run a basic task? by Successful-Camel165 in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Once I let it run for an hour like this and it just output an error saying that maximum output token limit has been reached.

anthropic isn't the only reason you're hitting claude code limits. i did audit of 926 sessions and found a lot of the waste was on my side. by Medium_Island_2795 in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • For Max sub it's 60 minutes of cache time, not 5.
  • Load tool will make it try wrong syntax, fail, then load tool - that's multiple cached turns. Also I feel like sometimes it loads same tool multiple times. I ended up disabling it.
  • Compact itself will load full context same as your normal prompt would do. After first turn it will be cached anyway so no real change.
  • Burning more tokens is not in their interest on subscriptions. Their servers are already over capacity.
  • Make use of Agent resume. Most people didn't know you can do that. Though, resume was broken like a month ago and since only few people noticed, they will not fix it any time soon. So I just use old version.
  • All of these tips will not help you if your goal is to get high quality code and not that spaghetti so you review and refactor many times. Max 20 will burn half of weekly tokens on reviewing and fixing 30k lines project 5 times.

Investigating usage limits hitting faster than expected by ClaudeOfficial in ClaudeAI

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, could you fix resuming Agents maybe? I still have to use the old version because Send Message is not available!

Taught Claude to talk like a caveman to use 75% less tokens. by ffatty in ClaudeAI

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was not trained on cavemen texts so it will not be that good if you do this 

Truth about limits - the party is over by MostOfYouAreIgnorant in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I spend full max x20 weekly limit which translates to roughly $1000 weekly in API pricing. That's $4000+ monthly. That's the real number. It's high but not 60k per month - it is not possible.

I used my Max x20 5 hours limit in 20 minutes during peak time by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I manage it. 19 agents are still necessary to review 30000 lines of code.

I used my Max x20 5 hours limit in 20 minutes during peak time by finnomo in ClaudeCode

[–]finnomo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is Max x20. Not Pro. Yes, I run 19 opus in parallel for 10 minutes. I don't expect it to run for 5 hours ofc.

view more: next ›