Developer shares human-led AI workflow to build apps from idea to working API

·4 views

A developer has published a detailed guide demonstrating how to build software applications using AI tools without producing low-quality, unreliable output. The workflow was tested through a demo project called Orbit, a Slack-style team chat app, built with assistance from ChatGPT, Claude, and Grok. The process involved setting clear requirements, reviewing AI-generated changes at each stage, and deriving an API only after the user interface behavior was accepted. The author emphasizes that AI cannot self-certify code as production-ready, and that human oversight at every handoff is essential to useful results. Orbit itself remains a limited demo with no authentication, shared public data, and no persistent storage across restarts.

Read the full story at DEV Community

This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.

Discussion (0)

Insufficient source content to report accurately

The provided source contains no readable article body — only a title and a restricted URL. There are no verifiable facts about who was involved, what exactly occurred, when or where it happened, or why. Reporting on this item would require inventing details not present in the source. No summary can be responsibly produced from this content.

0 comments Read more at Hacker News

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Dev Builds Theatre Prop Continuity Tracker to Catch Staging Errors

A developer created Prop Continuity Desk, a rehearsal planning web app designed to help small theatre productions track the physical movement of props across scenes. The app is built around a fictional six-scene play with twelve props and detects two key mistakes: placing the same prop in two locations within one scene, and moving a prop between scenes without a recorded transfer cue. It uses Next.js, React, TypeScript, and Sanity as its content backend, with scene reviews stored in separate documents to avoid overwriting the data being reviewed. A practice-copy feature lets visitors explore the rules without altering the live production plan, and any exported cue sheet from a practice session is clearly labelled as such. The project was built using Codex starting 26 September 2026, with the AI proposing the scenario, writing the code, and running the tests under the account owner's authorization.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Sekura JS Explores Sharing Software Verification Proofs Without Exposing Source Code

Sekura JS is developing an approach that separates a software module's source code from its verification contract (SJV) and proof artifact (SJP), allowing developers to share evidence of formal verification without disclosing proprietary implementations. The SJV document specifies the properties a module claims to satisfy, while the SJP carries the mathematical evidence produced during verification. A third-party verifier can replay the stored SMT obligations using tools like Z3 or CVC5 to confirm their validity without ever seeing the underlying source code. However, the project acknowledges a key limitation: replaying an SJP can confirm that the mathematical proofs are valid, but cannot independently verify that those proofs were actually generated from the specific private codebase the developer claims. This creates an explicit trust boundary between the private source code and the proof artifacts exchanged between parties.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Where Game Development Budgets Actually Go, Explained by Category

Game development costs are typically split across five core categories: engineering, art and audio, design, QA and testing, and project management. Engineering tends to consume the largest share, usually between 40 and 50 percent, covering gameplay systems, networking, platform work, and performance optimisation. Art and audio follow at 20 to 30 percent, while design, QA, and project management each account for roughly 5 to 15 percent. These ranges are based on agency-scoped projects and shift depending on genre, platform targets, team structure, and scope. When budgets are limited, understanding which category drives the most complexity for a given project can help teams prioritise spending more effectively.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community