evanklem2004

its a dinosaur pic bruh chill

You are being a Devin downer.

I am very glad you enjoyed it. I am definitely a fan of uncanny valley vibes too, maybe that Backrooms movie subconsciously influenced me when I made the demo. With all of my open source projects I try to have as much fun with it as possible and I definitely had fun making that video.

Sorry about the video bug, Github's manual on file attachments mentions video codecs being browser specific. I will be sure to use the most widely supported codec in the next update.

I definitely relate to a lot of your thinking here, I feel like it will just take a handful of years of experimenting with these new tools to settle on what really works. That was part of my rationale for making it more modular, as I continue to learn and grow with the tooling I can easily update my IDE to be super personalized.

It sounds like the sweet call of Vim is beckoning you.

Codex and Claude are the defaults for now but it is built to use any CLI of your choice via the terminal.

It's actually an original piece of music that I custom made for the demo so I am glad you liked it : )

sit under the lotus tree and it will come to you

yeah went back and forth on exactly this trade-off, you're right that vertical can produce tests tailored to the impl. horizontal forces invariants up front but the failure mode flips: you're tailoring tests to the architecture you imagined before any feedback from working code. so it's invariants-vs-behaviors, both have a tailoring failure mode just on different axes. compromise i landed on: vertical + an explicit anti-tailoring grill check at each cycle. definitely gonna tweak with more as i keep refining.

1): you have things backwards, the EvanFlow is not something i came up with but rather something i discovered similar to the dao. i am named Evan after the EvanFlow not the other way around.

2): you're right and dmitry called this out below too. shipped a fix that puts REFACTOR per-cycle, instead of being a deferred "after all tests pass" step. the old step 4 was iterate-shaped not TDD-shaped.

fair to call out but half true. i did send claude off to look up specific stats on failure modes (62% assertion correctness, etc), but the design decisions came from my own reading of anthropic's reports, the columbia daplab paper i cited, and a mix of matt pocock's lectures + my own anecdotal experience running this loop on real projects.

mmm good point! just shipped a fix that puts RED → GREEN → REFACTOR per cycle with the fresh test as safety net just like beck intended. macro/cross-cycle refactor lives in iterate now as its own separate thing so the two don't conflate. thanks for the catch : )

yeah that is a little confusing, tdd is actually a substep of execution. it was listed separately in the diagram because not every task uses TDD (config, generated types, etc. skip it), so the skill is invoked conditionally during execution rather than always. but the arrow notation made it look sequential when it's actually nested. updated the README diagram to show that. thanks for the nudge.