Dev review: coding model over-tests instead of doing real work, falls short of Fable hopes
gandamu_ml · x · 2026-10-21
Developer gandamuml shares hands-on feedback on a coding model that was expected to beat Fable (better and cheaper). Verdict: it works well as an almost pathologically conscientious code reviewer that finds defects, but as a lead developer it's disappointing.
Its core problem is over-testing and over-verifying instead of doing actual work, falling short of expectations that it would provide stronger lead-dev capability at lower cost.
Related event: Developer finds coding model over-tests instead of doing real work(2 posts)→
More from Models
- Reflection's open-weight Beam 1.0 (501B-A23B) free on Nous Portal for a week — alexcovo_eth · 2026-10-21
- Karpathy: you know RL is working when models stop thinking in English — joeddav · 2026-10-21
- Devin Fusion's dual-model setup scores 68 on Coding Agent Index at 31% lower cost than Claude Code — ArtificialAnlys · 2026-10-21
- Ascend 950DT hits 1/5-1/7 of GB200 decode throughput on DeepSeek-V4.1, but EP optimization may close the gap — teortaxesTex · 2026-10-21
- Gemini 4 Carbon enters early access, spotted in LMArena, stronger at 3D than Argon — lyraxana · 2026-10-21
- Musk: Grok Bot is the fastest-growing product he's ever seen, enterprise rollout in weeks — elonmusk · 2026-10-21