Skip to main content

HACKS.md

The most valuable comments I find in any given codebase look like this:

Hack! This thing is weird because of this and that reason. I tried to implement a more elegant solution, but due to X and Y constraints, I failed.
Hack! This is weird because there is a bug in library X that we depend on. See https://github.com/library/issues/420
Note! I tried options A, B, and C and decided to do this weird thing because, while it looks wrong, it turned out to be the best solution at the time of writing.

These comments do not explain what the code does. They explain why the code looks the way it does. They bring into light historical context, failed attempts, and external constraints that are otherwise invisible.

We all occasionally fail to communicate our intent to the next developer. That is normal and unavoidable. What matters is leaving a clear mark when something non-obvious or hacky is done on purpose.

Increasingly, the “next developer” is a metal-headed clanker: an LLM. LLMs are actually quite good at reading and understanding these comments. The problem is not comprehension. The problem is behavior. They tend to remove these comments, or when they introduce new hacks—either because they were instructed to or because they did so autonomously—they fail to leave the valuable "hack warning" comment traces.

Anyone who works with LLM-generated code has seen the opposite failure mode as well.

By default, LLMs are extremely verbose with comments. They happily pollute a codebase with low-value noise: restating what the code already says, line by line. Writing comments appears to be a behavior that is surprisingly hard to disable.

To add insult to injury, they often overwrite or delete the few comments that actually matter, the why comments, while adding commentary explaining trivial stuff that is self-evident from the code itself. The result is strictly worse than either a well-commented or an uncommented codebase: the signal is gone, the noise remains.

This led me to wonder whether hack documentation should live somewhere else entirely. Should there be a HACKS.md? Or would it be enough to give the agent explicit instructions about how to treat this class of comments?

Since there is no HACKS.md, I added a short, explicit rule to AGENTS.md:

If a hack or workaround is required, leave a comment explaining why it was done. Do not remove these comments unless you have confirmed they are no longer valid. Prefix such comments with NB; (nota bene).
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I'm not a passionate developer

A family friend of mine is an airlane pilot. A dream job for most, right? As a child, I certainly thought so. Now that I can have grown-up talks with him, I have discovered a more accurate description of his profession. He says that the truth about the job is that it is boring. To me, that is not that surprising. Airplanes are cool and all, but when you are in the middle of the Atlantic sitting next to the colleague you have been talking to past five years, how stimulating can that be? When he says the job is boring, it is not a bad kind of boring. It is a very specific boring. The "boring" you would want as a passenger. Uneventful.  Yet, he loves his job. According to him, an experienced pilot is most pleased when each and every tiny thing in the flight plan - goes according to plan. Passengers in the cabin of an expert pilot sit in the comfort of not even noticing who is flying. As someone employed in a field where being boring is not exactly in high demand, this sounds pro...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bird is causing high CPU on my macOS

There is no lack of people complaining about MacOS Tahoe, mostly about rounded corners and inconsistent design decisions. I have not paid that much attentention to that, but there is one mac bug i have paid attention to. It hasn't been a visual or ux but rather few system processes pegging the CPU. trustd , alongside with ecosystemd and ecosystemanalyticsd all reported high CPU usage. I can't exactly recall when this started, it might have predated my Tahoe upgrade but anyway, the trio of processes all had high CPU usage. Sure, it may have been the virtual efficiency cores and whether it affeced battery life or slowed down other processes i don't know to be hon...
Post a Comment
Read more

Ousterhout's law

Back in the day, everyone was using Winamp. It is a music player with the user interface of a mixing console. The bloody thing had an equalizer on the front page! As an amateur music producer, I know that EQ is a powerful tool but making changes that sound good is difficult, to say the least. Mixing engineers spend considerable effort with the artist to balance the frequency ranges to arrive at the desired musical outcome. I bet the 15-year-old me butchered a lot of songs with the thing. Now we are using Spotify, a player with basically a search bar and a play button. I ran into something called Ousterhout's Law on the  Operating Systems: Three Easy Pieces book . Here is a quote from the book TIP: AVOID VOO-DOO CONSTANTS (OUSTERHOUT’S LAW) Avoiding voo-doo constants is a good idea whenever possible. Unfortunately, as in the example above, it is often difficult. One could try to make the system learn a good value, but that too is not straightforward. The frequent result: a configura...
Post a Comment
Read more