How Anthropic teams use Claude Code

17 pointsposted 21 hours ago
by ramoz
(twitter.com)

5 Comments

ramoz

21 hours ago

I’ve been saying Claude Code feels more like an OS. There is a lot of power with an agent living in the OS and filesystem - vs bound by abstraction in the IDE.

I think this represents the next evolution of general office tooling (prev dominated by MSFT); which is why OAI bought Windsurf.

The future really isn’t about interacting with “agents” so much as it is “intelligent infrastructure.” Skillsets will be emphasized through planning and orchestrating these systems—Wands vs keyboards.

RobinL

20 hours ago

Codex also had this feeling to me, it's like a control centre for a repo, but it's easy to imagine that being the whole computer.

There's a kind of inversion in how you do things: e.g. rather than navigating to settings until you find the screen time controls and changing the settings, you explain in natural language what to do, the agent asynchronously proposes the solution, and you just click accept or reject.

AndrewKemendo

18 hours ago

I’ve read about half and it’s right in line with where I’m seeing the value for these assistants. This is almost like a best practices guide in my experience so far.

The moment these tools can do environment creation-management, key/secret management and proper CD they’ll get all my money.

karmakaze

15 hours ago

I'm disappointed by more limited use by product developers:

  Synchronous coding for core features
> For more critical features touching the application's business logic, the team works synchronously with Claude Code, giving detailed prompts with specific implementation instructions. They monitor the process in real-time to ensure code quality, style guide compliance, and proper architecture while letting Claude handle the repetitive coding work.

I question the 'synchronous' aspect. Whenever I try to use it, it feels very batch oriented with the delays interrupting my thoughts and workflow, often starting to do something else.