Skip to content

Commit 201a9d1

Browse files
committed
Merge branch 'fix-code-blocks-issue-49'
2 parents 503dded + 8f2ded7 commit 201a9d1

File tree

7 files changed

+200
-45
lines changed

7 files changed

+200
-45
lines changed
Binary file not shown.

blog/github-mode-productivity.md

+13-3
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -53,7 +53,10 @@ MyCoder can integrate with your development pipeline:
5353
### Example 1: Asynchronous Code Review
5454

5555
```
56-
In PR #45, which fixes issue #44, you mentioned adding a pre-push hook with the same validation as the pre-commit hook. Can you confirm whether this introduces redundant checks that might slow down development? If so, we should optimize it.
56+
In PR #45, which fixes issue #44, you mentioned adding a pre-push
57+
hook with the same validation as the pre-commit hook. Can you
58+
confirm whether this introduces redundant checks that might
59+
slow down development? If so, we should optimize it.
5760
```
5861

5962
**Why this works well:**
@@ -64,7 +67,9 @@ In PR #45, which fixes issue #44, you mentioned adding a pre-push hook with the
6467
### Example 2: Batch Processing Multiple Issues
6568

6669
```
67-
Can you implement GitHub issues #31 and #30 together in a single PR? This will ensure related changes are reviewed and merged simultaneously. Once done, submit the PR and link both issues.
70+
Can you implement GitHub issues #31 and #30 together in a single
71+
PR? This will ensure related changes are reviewed and merged
72+
simultaneously. Once done, submit the PR and link both issues.
6873
```
6974

7075
**Why this works well:**
@@ -75,7 +80,12 @@ Can you implement GitHub issues #31 and #30 together in a single PR? This will e
7580
### Example 3: Autonomous Debugging
7681

7782
```
78-
You just created PR #34, fixing issues #30 and #31. However, the CI is failing. Check GitHub Actions to diagnose the issue and determine if your recent repository reorganization has affected workflows or Docker configurations. If unrelated to the fixes, create a separate GitHub issue and submit an independent PR to address it.
83+
You just created PR #34, fixing issues #30 and #31. However,
84+
the CI is failing. Check GitHub Actions to diagnose the issue
85+
and determine if your recent repository reorganization has
86+
affected workflows or Docker configurations. If unrelated to
87+
the fixes, create a separate GitHub issue and submit an
88+
independent PR to address it.
7989
```
8090

8191
**Why this works well:**

docs/examples/code-development.md

+75-20
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -12,7 +12,11 @@ MyCoder can assist with a wide range of code development tasks, from implementin
1212
### Example: Implementing Recommendations from an Issue
1313

1414
```
15-
Can you implement the recommendations 2 and 3 from issue #44? You can look at the CI Github Actions workflow in ../mycoder-websites/.github as guide to setting up a similar CI action that validates the build and runs lint, etc for this repo.
15+
Can you implement the recommendations 2 and 3 from issue
16+
#44? You can look at the CI Github Actions workflow in
17+
../mycoder-websites/.github as guide to setting up a
18+
similar CI action that validates the build and runs
19+
lint, etc for this repo.
1620
```
1721

1822
**Why this works well:**
@@ -28,21 +32,57 @@ Can you implement the recommendations 2 and 3 from issue #44? You can look at th
2832
### Example: Refactoring an SDK Implementation
2933

3034
```
31-
Recently this project was converted from using the Anthropic SDK directly to using the Vercel AI SDK. Since then it has created reliability problems. That change was made 4 days ago in this PR: https://github.com/drivecore/mycoder/pull/55/files
32-
33-
And it was built upon by adding support for ollama, grok/xai and openai in subsequent PRs. I would like to back out the adoption of the Vercel AI SDK, both the 'ai' npm library as well as the '@ai-sdk' npm libraries and thus also back out support for Ollama, OpenAI and Grok.
34-
35-
In the future I will add back these but the Vercel AI SDK is not working well. While we back this out I would like to, as we re-implement using the Anthropic SDK, I would like to keep some level of abstraction around the specific LLM.
36-
37-
Thus I would like to have our own Message type and it should have system, user, assistant, tool_use, tool_result sub-types with their respective fields. We can base it on the Vercel AI SDK. And then we should implement a generic generateText() type that takes messages and the tools and other standard LLM settings and returns a new set of messages - just as anthropic's SDK does.
38-
39-
We can have an Anthropic-specific function that takes the API key + the model and returns a generateText() function that meets the generic type. Thus we can isolate the Anthropic specific code from the rest of the application making it easier to support other models in the future.
40-
41-
The anthropic specific implementation of generateText will have to convert from the generic messages to anthropics specific type of messages and after text completion, it will need to convert back. This shouldn't be too involved.
42-
43-
We can skip token caching on the first go around, but lets create both an issue for this main conversion I've described as well as follow on issues to add token caching as well as OpenAI and Ollama support. You can check out old branches of the code here if that helps you analyze the code to understand.
44-
45-
I would like a plan of implementation as a comment on the first issue - the main conversion away from Vercel AI SDK.
35+
Recently this project was converted from using the
36+
Anthropic SDK directly to using the Vercel AI SDK.
37+
Since then it has created reliability problems. That
38+
change was made 4 days ago in this PR:
39+
https://github.com/drivecore/mycoder/pull/55/files
40+
41+
And it was built upon by adding support for ollama,
42+
grok/xai and openai in subsequent PRs. I would like
43+
to back out the adoption of the Vercel AI SDK, both
44+
the 'ai' npm library as well as the '@ai-sdk' npm
45+
libraries and thus also back out support for Ollama,
46+
OpenAI and Grok.
47+
48+
In the future I will add back these but the Vercel AI
49+
SDK is not working well. While we back this out I
50+
would like to, as we re-implement using the Anthropic
51+
SDK, I would like to keep some level of abstraction
52+
around the specific LLM.
53+
54+
Thus I would like to have our own Message type and
55+
it should have system, user, assistant, tool_use,
56+
tool_result sub-types with their respective fields.
57+
We can base it on the Vercel AI SDK. And then we
58+
should implement a generic generateText() type that
59+
takes messages and the tools and other standard LLM
60+
settings and returns a new set of messages - just
61+
as anthropic's SDK does.
62+
63+
We can have an Anthropic-specific function that
64+
takes the API key + the model and returns a
65+
generateText() function that meets the generic type.
66+
Thus we can isolate the Anthropic specific code from
67+
the rest of the application making it easier to
68+
support other models in the future.
69+
70+
The anthropic specific implementation of generateText
71+
will have to convert from the generic messages to
72+
anthropics specific type of messages and after text
73+
completion, it will need to convert back. This
74+
shouldn't be too involved.
75+
76+
We can skip token caching on the first go around,
77+
but lets create both an issue for this main conversion
78+
I've described as well as follow on issues to add
79+
token caching as well as OpenAI and Ollama support.
80+
You can check out old branches of the code here if
81+
that helps you analyze the code to understand.
82+
83+
I would like a plan of implementation as a comment
84+
on the first issue - the main conversion away from
85+
Vercel AI SDK.
4686
```
4787

4888
**Why this works well:**
@@ -60,9 +100,20 @@ I would like a plan of implementation as a comment on the first issue - the main
60100
### Example: Investigating Build Configuration Issues
61101

62102
```
63-
When I run this command \"pnpm --filter @web3dsurvey/api-server build\" in the current directory, it runs into an error because one of the packages in this mono-repo upon which @web3dsurvey/api-server is dependent is not built, but I am confused because I thought that pnpm would automatically build packages that are depended upon.
64-
65-
I must have some part of the configuration of the current project incorrect right? Can you create an issue for this and then investigate. You can use the command \"pnpm clean:dist\" to reset the package to its non-built state.
103+
When I run this command \"pnpm --filter
104+
@web3dsurvey/api-server build\" in the current
105+
directory, it runs into an error because one of
106+
the packages in this mono-repo upon which
107+
@web3dsurvey/api-server is dependent is not built,
108+
but I am confused because I thought that pnpm
109+
would automatically build packages that are
110+
depended upon.
111+
112+
I must have some part of the configuration of the
113+
current project incorrect right? Can you create
114+
an issue for this and then investigate. You can
115+
use the command \"pnpm clean:dist\" to reset the
116+
package to its non-built state.
66117
```
67118

68119
**Why this works well:**
@@ -77,7 +128,11 @@ I must have some part of the configuration of the current project incorrect righ
77128
### Example: Investigating CI Failures
78129

79130
```
80-
It seems that the latest GitHub action failed, can you investigate it and make a GitHub issue with the problem and then push a PR that fixes the issue? Please wait for the new GitHub action to complete before declaring success.
131+
It seems that the latest GitHub action failed,
132+
can you investigate it and make a GitHub issue
133+
with the problem and then push a PR that fixes
134+
the issue? Please wait for the new GitHub
135+
action to complete before declaring success.
81136
```
82137

83138
**Why this works well:**

docs/examples/code-review.md

+19-3
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -12,7 +12,13 @@ MyCoder is excellent at reviewing code, analyzing PRs, and providing feedback on
1212
### Example: Reviewing a PR for Potential Duplication
1313

1414
```
15-
In the current PR #45, which fixes issue #44 and it is also currently checked out as the current branch, there isn't duplication of the checks are there? In your writeup you say that \"added pre-push hook with the same validation\". It seems that we have both a pre-commit hook and a pre-push hook that do the same thing? Won't that slow things down?
15+
In the current PR #45, which fixes issue #44 and it
16+
is also currently checked out as the current branch,
17+
there isn't duplication of the checks are there? In
18+
your writeup you say that \"added pre-push hook with
19+
the same validation\". It seems that we have both a
20+
pre-commit hook and a pre-push hook that do the same
21+
thing? Won't that slow things down?
1622
```
1723

1824
**Why this works well:**
@@ -28,7 +34,14 @@ In the current PR #45, which fixes issue #44 and it is also currently checked ou
2834
### Example: Reviewing Package Manager Configuration
2935

3036
```
31-
I think that the github action workflows and maybe the docker build are still making assumptions about using npm rather than pnpm. Can you look at ../Business/drivecore/mycoder-websites as an example of docker files that use pnpm and also github action workflows that use pnpm and adapt the current project to use that style. Please create a github issue and then once the task is complete please submit a PR.
37+
I think that the github action workflows and maybe the
38+
docker build are still making assumptions about using
39+
npm rather than pnpm. Can you look at
40+
../Business/drivecore/mycoder-websites as an example
41+
of docker files that use pnpm and also github action
42+
workflows that use pnpm and adapt the current project
43+
yo use that style. Please create a github issue and
44+
then once the task is complete please submit a PR.
3245
```
3346

3447
**Why this works well:**
@@ -44,7 +57,10 @@ I think that the github action workflows and maybe the docker build are still ma
4457
### Example: Requesting UI Improvements
4558

4659
```
47-
Can you make the blue that is used for the links to be a little more dark-grey blue? And can you remove the underline from links by default? Please create a Github issue for this and a PR.
60+
Can you make the blue that is used for the links to
61+
be a little more dark-grey blue? And can you remove
62+
the underline from links by default? Please create
63+
a Github issue for this and a PR.
4864
```
4965

5066
**Why this works well:**

docs/examples/devops.md

+31-6
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -12,7 +12,11 @@ MyCoder can help with various DevOps tasks, including setting up CI/CD pipelines
1212
### Example: Setting Up GitHub Actions Workflows
1313

1414
```
15-
Can you implement the recommendations 2 and 3 from issue #44. You can look at the CI Github Actions workflow in ../mycoder-websites/.github as guide to setting up a similar CI action that validates the build and runs lint, etc for this repo.
15+
Can you implement the recommendations 2 and 3 from
16+
issue #44. You can look at the CI Github Actions
17+
workflow in ../mycoder-websites/.github as guide
18+
to setting up a similar CI action that validates
19+
the build and runs lint, etc for this repo.
1620
```
1721

1822
**Why this works well:**
@@ -27,7 +31,14 @@ Can you implement the recommendations 2 and 3 from issue #44. You can look at th
2731
### Example: Converting from npm to pnpm
2832

2933
```
30-
I think that the github action workflows and maybe the docker build are still making assumptions about using npm rather than pnpm. Can you look at ../Business/drivecore/mycoder-websites as an example of docker files that use pnpm and also github action workflows that use pnpm and adapt the current project to use that style. Please create a github issue and then once the task is complete please submit a PR.
34+
I think that the github action workflows and maybe
35+
the docker build are still making assumptions about
36+
using npm rather than pnpm. Can you look at
37+
../Business/drivecore/mycoder-websites as an example
38+
of docker files that use pnpm and also github action
39+
workflows that use pnpm and adapt the current project
40+
to use that style. Please create a github issue and
41+
then once the task is complete please submit a PR.
3142
```
3243

3344
**Why this works well:**
@@ -42,9 +53,19 @@ I think that the github action workflows and maybe the docker build are still ma
4253
### Example: Investigating Mono-Repo Build Issues
4354

4455
```
45-
When I run this command \"pnpm --filter @web3dsurvey/api-server build\" in the current directory, it runs into an error because one of the packages in this mono-repo upon which @web3dsurvey/api-server is dependent is not built, but I am confused because I thought that pnpm would automatically build packages that are depended upon.
46-
47-
I must have some part of the configuration of the current project incorrect right? Can you create an issue for this and then investigate. You can use the command \"pnpm clean:dist\" to reset the package to its non-built state.
56+
When I run this command \"pnpm --filter
57+
@web3dsurvey/api-server build\" in the current directory,
58+
it runs into an error because one of the packages in
59+
this mono-repo upon which @web3dsurvey/api-server is
60+
dependent is not built, but I am confused because I
61+
thought that pnpm would automatically build packages
62+
that are depended upon.
63+
64+
I must have some part of the configuration of the
65+
current project incorrect right? Can you create an
66+
issue for this and then investigate. You can use
67+
the command \"pnpm clean:dist\" to reset the package
68+
to its non-built state.
4869
```
4970

5071
**Why this works well:**
@@ -60,7 +81,11 @@ I must have some part of the configuration of the current project incorrect righ
6081
### Example: Debugging GitHub Actions
6182

6283
```
63-
It seems that the latest GitHub action failed, can you investigate it and make a GitHub issue with the problem and then push a PR that fixes the issue? Please wait for the new GitHub action to complete before declaring success.
84+
It seems that the latest GitHub action failed, can you
85+
investigate it and make a GitHub issue with the problem
86+
and then push a PR that fixes the issue? Please wait
87+
for the new GitHub action to complete before declaring
88+
success.
6489
```
6590

6691
**Why this works well:**

docs/examples/project-management.md

+36-13
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -12,11 +12,23 @@ MyCoder excels at helping with project management tasks such as creating issues,
1212
### Example: Requesting Multiple GitHub Issues for Project Improvements
1313

1414
```
15-
Can you create a Github issue for removing the base tsconfig.json file and instead just using fully defined tsconfig.json files in each package in both the packages folder and the services folder? Complex tsconfig.json strategies with shared settings can introduce a lot of unnecessary complexity.
16-
17-
Can you also make a Github issue for combining all packages into a single packages folder rather than having them split between packages and services? There isn't enough packages to warrant the split here.
18-
19-
Third can you create an issue for updating the root README.md so that it describes the project, what each package does and the main ways developers (and agentic agents) should interact with it?
15+
Can you create a Github issue for removing the base
16+
tsconfig.json file and instead just using fully
17+
defined tsconfig.json files in each package in
18+
both the packages folder and the services folder?
19+
Complex tsconfig.json strategies with shared
20+
settings can introduce a lot of unnecessary complexity.
21+
22+
Can you also make a Github issue for combining
23+
all packages into a single packages folder rather
24+
than having them split between packages and
25+
services? There isn't enough packages to warrant
26+
the split here.
27+
28+
Third can you create an issue for updating the
29+
root README.md so that it describes the project,
30+
what each package does and the main ways developers
31+
(and agentic agents) should interact with it?
2032
```
2133

2234
**Why this works well:**
@@ -32,7 +44,8 @@ Third can you create an issue for updating the root README.md so that it describ
3244
### Example: Requesting Implementation of Multiple Related Issues
3345

3446
```
35-
Can you implement github issue #31 and also #30 and do a combined PR back to Github?
47+
Can you implement github issue #31 and also #30 and
48+
do a combined PR back to Github?
3649
```
3750

3851
**Why this works well:**
@@ -46,26 +59,36 @@ Can you implement github issue #31 and also #30 and do a combined PR back to Git
4659
### Example: Implementing a Specific Issue
4760

4861
```
49-
Can you execute issue 32 and make a PR for it back to github?
62+
Can you execute issue 32 and make a PR for it back
63+
to github?
5064
```
5165

5266
**Why this works well:**
5367
- Simple, direct instruction
5468
- References a specific issue by number
5569
- Clearly states the expected outcome (a PR)
5670

57-
**Technique:** Using GitHub issue numbers as references gives MyCoder the context it needs to understand the task without repeating all the details.
71+
**Technique:** Using GitHub issue numbers as references
72+
gives MyCoder the context it needs to understand the
73+
task without repeating all the details.
5874

5975
## Project Assessment and Issue Creation
6076

6177
### Example: Investigating Build Failures and Creating Issues
6278

6379
```
64-
You just created PR #34 which fixes issues #30 and #31. But the CI is failing, you can check the Github Actions to see why. Can you address the issue?
65-
66-
I do worry that your recent reorganization of the repo may not align with some of the assumptions in the Github action workflows or maybe the docker files or something. Anyhow, please have a look and if you can fix it, please do.
67-
68-
If the issue is unrelated to the two issues you fixed in the recent PR, then make a Github issue to capture the problem and make a separate PR to fix it.
80+
You just created PR #34 which fixes issues #30 and #31.
81+
But the CI is failing, you can check the Github Actions
82+
to see why. Can you address the issue?
83+
84+
I do worry that your recent reorganization of the repo
85+
may not align with some of the assumptions in the Github
86+
action workflows or maybe the docker files or something.
87+
Anyhow, please have a look and if you can fix it, please do.
88+
89+
If the issue is unrelated to the two issues you fixed
90+
in the recent PR, then make a Github issue to capture
91+
the problem and make a separate PR to fix it.
6992
```
7093

7194
**Why this works well:**

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)