Hacker News Reader

Comment by simonw | Hacker News Reader

This is an intimidating amount of code! 12,303 lines of C and 244,740 lines of Python, which looks to be a ton of monkeypatching plus huge amounts of test code.

Only one commit added all of that, just two hours ago.

The published numbers are impressive, but its hard to evaluate how much trust can be put in a project of this complexity at this early stage.

View on HN

I've restored the git history. This show hn probably would have gone much better if I knew you could add a text section to the link. I had written up a whole post to explain the project and why the code exists. Only for that to get like 3 upvotes and disappear into the void. Then I posted this and it got more attention but had no context since I never planned it.

The project has a few goals:

(1) see how far I can push AI -- this project is extremely complex -- an n:m work-stealing stackful runtime for Python with multiple I/O backends. If I can reasonably get such a project stable fully vibe coded. Then that sells the model to me at least.

(2) scale Python's networking as there is a huge gap between Python and Go. Most people don't think of Python as their first choice for networking. But I love python, i think its extremely elegant. So what if we could add a runtime extension that improved python networking.

That's the work so far at least. It was about 2 - 3 months of testing and the commits now show the history.

Nice! Having the history makes it easier to evaluate all the work you've put in, this is really impressive.

thanks a lot, thats kind of you to say. Claude definitely deserves a lot of credit too even though its a tool. It would have taken me years to do all that coding.

> its hard to evaluate how much trust can be put in a project of this complexity at this early stage.

I don't know, I'm not finding it hard to evaluate that at all.

I've had bad enough experiences with gevent in the (now fairly distant) past, and that's a well-established project, just a subtle one with a large blast radius. This has all of those problems, plus is _much_ larger and I don't think can possibly have been tested as widely as I would want. I get maybe there's a lot of test code, but I think this kind of thing you only really know when the rubber meets the road.

I just copy pasted the work from my old repo into the main one. The main reason was hundreds of MD files and agent results were added into the repo that would have been impossible to clear from history.

This wasn't all written in one shot. I built the project over several months and spent the whole time testing it. Most of the code in the repo is QA / tests.

I had written an article that speaks about the project that I'd hoped would get upvoted (instead of this github link.) It speaks a lot about where the project aims, how it works, and the testing process, (read about my testing process at the end):

https://robertsdotpm.github.io/software_engineering/goroutin...

It might be worth recreating the git history from scratch in a way that excludes the markdown files - I've used Claude Code and OpenAI Codex to do that in the past with git-filter-branch. Lets you preserve the important history but clean out all the junk.

This is a good idea. I'll restore the history in the coming days. Just want to make sure there's nothing embarrassing as claude dumped so many files.

Why would you be embarassed for output by an LLM? You might be overthinking this.

Also, it would be courteous to mention in the readme just how this code came about.

Code is a liability, not an asset.

250k lines of code in one commit is reason enough to disregard the project entirely, IMO. Vibe code if one wants, but that is just madness...

It's pretty obvious that the author didn't write a single commit during development, they just squashed their commits into a single commit at the end.

Whether they did that or had an LLM one shot it, I dont really care. Commit history is pretty important if you ever want to try fixing bugs or improving features in the future.

This seems kind of like a laughable and shallow reason for you to disregard my entire project.

>book too large

>didn't read

>0/10, heh

Most of that code is from:

(1) simulating all of asyncio (not a main feature)

(2) monkey patching (not a main feature)

(3) synthetic program suite (dynamically built sample projects)

(4) entirety of the asyncio test suite in the test dir

(5) and other tests

The actual code surface for the run time is very small. The parent comment just ran a blind measure over the whole repo.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com