SShortSingh.
Back to feed

Tray app forecasts when you'll hit your weekly Claude Code usage limit

0
·12 views

Claude Code subscriptions have a 5-hour session limit and a weekly cap, and the weekly one is hard to track because it is not obvious how a week's work is pacing. A developer built Claude Code Tray, a Windows tray app that shows usage as the icon and turns red when the current pace would exhaust the limit before reset. The app uses different logic for the short session window, which reacts quickly via a rolling slope, and the weekly window, which compares usage against an even-burn baseline to avoid false alarms from bursts of work. For a more realistic forecast, its Statistics view maps the remaining quota onto the user's typical active hours, and it suggests the earliest resume time that would still keep the week under the limit. The app reads the local OAuth token and makes minimal API calls to read rate-limit headers, a practice the developer acknowledges is a gray area under Anthropic's terms.

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)

Log in to join the discussion and vote.

Log in

Related stories

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Checklist for Adding AIoT to Existing Industrial Monitoring Systems

The article advises facilities with existing asset data to first confirm that the data is reliable enough for the specific decision they want to improve, rather than starting with an AI model. It recommends defining one operational use case with a clear owner, such as prioritizing abnormal equipment readings for investigation. Teams should verify that each measurement is tied to the correct device and operating context, and map data flows to find the smallest useful integration. The piece urges starting with decision support rather than automated physical control, which would require separate authorization and safety review. It also stresses judging the pilot on workflow outcomes like missed events and unnecessary alerts, not just model accuracy.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Refactors That Return Copies Can Silently Break Callers Who Rely on In-Place Mutation

A developer argues that characterization tests typically check only return values, missing whether a function alters its arguments in place. Replacing an in-place sort with a sorted copy can keep a test suite passing while production callers continue reading stale data. To catch such changes, the author proposes a Python decorator that snapshots arguments before and after each call and logs any differences to a ledger file. The recommended workflow is to identify candidate mutating functions with grep, wrap them, drive them with recorded real payloads, and commit a stable baseline ledger. The article stresses that the ledger must be deterministic across runs, since run-to-run noise would undermine it as a reliable contract check.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Tens of Thousands of Gitea and n8n Instances Exposed Online, Raising Credential Risks

Internet scan data counts roughly 117,500 indexed assets identifying as Gitea and about 420,000 as n8n, both self-hosted tools. The article argues these counts reflect software presence rather than actual secret exposure, since the real risk depends on each instance's configuration. Gitea stores repositories, deploy keys, tokens, and SSH keys, while n8n holds API credentials for connected services within workflow definitions. Key settings include INSTALL_LOCK, SECRET_KEY, and DISABLE_REGISTRATION, and misconfiguration can leave open registration or an unlocked setup page. The author recommends operators verify their version, registration policy, and owner account settings.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

AI Speeds Up Coding but Slows QA, Raising Technical Debt Costs for Software Teams

Faros AI's Q3 2026 report, covering 22,000 developers, finds that AI-assisted teams deploy more often but face larger pull requests, more unreviewed merges, and a 300% rise in time spent in QA. Monthly incidents have risen 125%, suggesting the cost of AI-accelerated development has shifted downstream to verification and release. GitClear's analysis of 623 million code changes from 2023 to 2026 reports rising duplicated code, more error-hiding patterns, and a 70% decline in refactoring as AI-assisted commits grew. The article argues that teams adopted AI tools faster than the supporting practices needed for quality, such as shared agent instructions, fast tests, and CI checks for common AI mistakes. The author notes that Faros and GitClear are industry studies rather than peer-reviewed research, though DORA findings point in the same direction.