I just hit my Claude Max limit for the first time _ever_ thanks to workflows lol

Like 90 agents ran to do a code review of a fairly small package I have.

They're really looking for us to increase token usage aren't they?

This is a fundamental incentive issue with any company that does all of training models, building harnesses for them, and offering them as a service.

I feel like using $1.3M/year is a wild outlier. A $200/month Max sub is a pretty cheap way to get quite a lot of benefit.

His usage is actually 12x that ...

I’ve recently switched to jj and it is truly amazing. It too about a week for me to “get it”. The tool is amazing but I think there’s way too much emphasis on what it does/allows rather than what benefits it brings to your workflow. If they get that marketing right I could see it growing. If not, I’ll keep using it

Would you be willing to pitch why you like jj and find it useful? How were you using git?

I use git mostly on single-dev projects, with branched development patterns.

Would someone like me with a simple git use-case find JJ enjoyable?

jj is amazing, even as a solo dev on small projects. It's difficult to explain because it depends of each usage, but it's very easy and safe (you can undo everything) to just try and see.

It did for sure. And Tailwind absolutely doesn’t need to be done this way. I think this is a correlation-not-causation issue

I disagree. With Tailwind you think in nested classes which ergonomically encourages “I need a div for this class”.

Very similar to early React where every component had to return a single real parent element (now you can return a fragment) so people chose div.

I prefer writing plain CSS over Tailwind

But I get component-scoped CSS (via Vue) and use custom props to abstract away hardcoded values

Tailwind isn’t the only option for those features

We use tailwind and are capable of building accessible websites without any issue. People could make all the same mistakes with CSS for accessibility. It’s the not knowing how to make accessible content that leads to inaccessible content, not the tool you use to implement the styling.

KFC in Japan is not fair.

But I have a workflow I like with git and I can’t see how jj would be better. I’m genuinely curious as to whether it would be or not, but the behaviours people are describing are not things that interest me.

For me the killer feature of jj is how much easier it makes rebasing. With git, if I knew a coworker had recently merged changes to a file I’d been working on, I would really dread syncing because I knew there was a good chance I’d get stuck in rebase hell.

With jj, you still have to deal with conflicts, but you can do it on your own time, so I never fear syncing anymore. Also, on the rare occasion that I mess up a merge, I no longer have to pull out my git sorcerer hat to fix it. I just `jj undo` and it’s like it never happened.

There must be some kind of split in how people work or something. I’ve never had the desire to jump around the git tree. I never squash commits. I basically never stash changes. All the things that people say jj makes easier are things I never even want to do. Not because they’re not easy with git, but because it sounds hard to keep straight in my head.

Maybe. Different organisations work at different paces and with different contention rates. If you're on a small team and less being tugged about then you might not find value with this stuff.

But I frequently have cases where I have some changes I'm making to repo `acme`. I'll put a PR up for review and then I'll start on a second PR for the same repo. I stack these commits on top of my previous PR. If I then notice a problem in the earlier work I can easily fix it and have the changes ripple down to the later PR. Or if somebody else merges something in against `main` it's really easy using `jj rebase` to move my commits against the new version of `main`. With a single `jj rebase` I can move all of my stacked PRs over to the new version of `main` and have every stacked PR updated.

Okay but why would they use jj when they do trunk-based dev

I do trunk based dev. My colleagues prefer git. I still prefer to use jj.