zlacker

>>hugoda+(OP)
I am really confused as to what happened here. The use of ‘disabled organization’ to refer to the author made it extra confusing.

I think I kind of have an idea what the author was doing, but not really.

>>cortes+w7
The author was using instance A of Claude to update a `claude.md` while another instance B of Claude was consuming that file. When Claude B did something wrong, the author asked Claude A to update the `claude.md` so that Claude B didn’t make the same mistake again

>>superb+eb
I don't understand how having two separate instances of Claude helps here. I can understand using multiple Claude instances to work in parallel but in this case, it seems all this process is linear...

>>olalon+mu
If you look at the code it will be obvious. Imagine I’m the creator of React. When someone does “create new app” I want to put a Claude.md in the dir so that they can get started easily.

I want this Claude.md to be useful. What is the natural solution to me?

>>renewi+tK
I'd probably do it like this: ask Claude to do a task, and when it fails, have it update its Claude.md so it doesn’t repeat the mistake. After a few iterations, once the Claude.md looks good, just copy-paste it into the scaffolding tool.

>>olalon+VN
Right, so you see the part where you "ask Claude to do a task" and then "copy-paste it into the template"? He was automating that because he has some n tasks he wants it to do without damaging the prior tasks.

>>renewi+lO
You can just clear the context or restart your Claude instance between tasks. e.g.:

  > do task 1
  ...task fails...
  > please update Claude.md so you don't make X mistake
  > /clear
  > do task 2
  ... task fails ...
  > please update Claude.md so you don't make Y mistake
  > /clear
  etc.

If you want a clean state between tasks you can just commit your Claude.md and `git reset --hard`.

I just don't get why you'd need have to a separate Claude that is solely responsible for updating Claude.md. Maybe they didn't want to bother with git?

>>olalon+YR
Presumably they didn't want to sit there and monitor Claude Code doing this for each of the 14 things they want done. Using a harness around Claude Code (or its SDK) is perfectly sane for this. I do it routinely. You just automate the entire process so that if you change APIs or you change the tasks, the harness can run and ensure that all of your sets are correctly re-done.

Sitting there and manually typing in "do thing 1; oh it failed? make it not fail. okay, now commit" is incredibly tedious.

>>renewi+nU
They said they were copy/pasting back and forth. But regardless, what do you mean by "harness" and "sets"? Are you referring to a specific tool that orchestrates Claude Code instances? This is not terminology I'm familiar with in this context. If you have any link that explains what you are talking about, would be appreciated.

>>olalon+5Y
Ah, it's unfortunate. I think we just lack a common language. Another time, perhaps.

You're correct that his "pasting the error back in Claude A" does sort of make the whole thing pointless. I might have assumed more competence on his side than is warranted. That makes the whole comment thread on my side unlikely to be correct.