6 ms·

I used it in a similar way, and once you get it going, it's much faster, since it can reuse the background agent which now has a primed context. I got 30 sec tu

I used it in a similar way, and once you get it going, it's much faster, since it can reuse the background agent which now has a primed context. I got 30 sec turn around times. And you can talk about the next change while the previous one is being implemented.

embedding-shape 5d ago
> I got 30 sec turn around times. For a single line change that could be completed in maybe 10 seconds if the agent didn't do the whole communication overhead dance, half a minute is a long time to sit and wait during playtesting to just update some parameter. > And you can talk about the next change while the previous one is being implemented. Yeaah, that's not how I work with agents in general, we work on one thing, do it properly and then clean up, then refactor, then testing, more refactor and so on, until a thing is 100% nailed down and properly implemented and then move on. I don't know how people can work on multiple things at the same time, unless they're really simple tasks or small projects. But almost nothing in medium/long-term game development is that simple.
- dist-epoch 5d ago
  Maybe a one line change takes 2 min because it needs to run the full test suite and so on. I have special instructions in my AGENTS.md to bypass running the full QA suite for small contained changes, and to run a targeted one instead. And if an error passes through, it will be caught the next time the full suite is run. I have both a Rust and a Python project, the Python one has a full QA suite, the Rust one is much more bare bones, and surprisingly, I can have Astra implement a small Rust change in 10 seconds, but not a Python one.
  - embedding-shape 5d ago
    > Maybe a one line change takes 2 min because it needs to run the full test suite and so on. No, it's a runtime parameter, imagine "walk speed", with zero tests as it's a 100% authored experience, tests live elsewhere. The one line change takes 2 minutes because of the communication overhead, which I clearly stated in my previous comment. One turn having one reasoning block, one tool call and one final reply, is obviously gonna be faster than one turn with a sub-agent which is at least two reasoning blocks, two tool calls, two final replies, two messages passed between the two agents. I'm not sure why this be surprising to anyone that it'd be slower.
    - dist-epoch 5d ago
      You can use regular voice dictation to talk directly to the Astra model, using an app like Handy. Then you have zero message passing overhead. I do that when I know exactly what I want, and use ChatGPT voice when I need to explore the solution space.
      - embedding-shape 5d ago
        > You can use regular voice dictation to talk directly to the Astra model, using an app like Handy. Then you have zero message passing overhead. Yeah, but then it's no longer GPT-Live-1 which is what we're discussing here, the point is the bidirectional voice mode and the faster response times...

embedding-shape 5d ago

> I got 30 sec turn around times. For a single line change that could be completed in maybe 10 seconds if the agent didn't do the whole communication overhead dance, half a minute is a long time to sit and wait during playtesting to just update some parameter. > And you can talk about the next change while the previous one is being implemented. Yeaah, that's not how I work with agents in general, we work on one thing, do it properly and then clean up, then refactor, then testing, more refactor and so on, until a thing is 100% nailed down and properly implemented and then move on. I don't know how people can work on multiple things at the same time, unless they're really simple tasks or small projects. But almost nothing in medium/long-term game development is that simple.

dist-epoch 5d ago
Maybe a one line change takes 2 min because it needs to run the full test suite and so on. I have special instructions in my AGENTS.md to bypass running the full QA suite for small contained changes, and to run a targeted one instead. And if an error passes through, it will be caught the next time the full suite is run. I have both a Rust and a Python project, the Python one has a full QA suite, the Rust one is much more bare bones, and surprisingly, I can have Astra implement a small Rust change in 10 seconds, but not a Python one.
- embedding-shape 5d ago
  > Maybe a one line change takes 2 min because it needs to run the full test suite and so on. No, it's a runtime parameter, imagine "walk speed", with zero tests as it's a 100% authored experience, tests live elsewhere. The one line change takes 2 minutes because of the communication overhead, which I clearly stated in my previous comment. One turn having one reasoning block, one tool call and one final reply, is obviously gonna be faster than one turn with a sub-agent which is at least two reasoning blocks, two tool calls, two final replies, two messages passed between the two agents. I'm not sure why this be surprising to anyone that it'd be slower.
  - dist-epoch 5d ago
    You can use regular voice dictation to talk directly to the Astra model, using an app like Handy. Then you have zero message passing overhead. I do that when I know exactly what I want, and use ChatGPT voice when I need to explore the solution space.
    - embedding-shape 5d ago
      > You can use regular voice dictation to talk directly to the Astra model, using an app like Handy. Then you have zero message passing overhead. Yeah, but then it's no longer GPT-Live-1 which is what we're discussing here, the point is the bidirectional voice mode and the faster response times...