I work on a fairly large analytical codebase: Python-heavy, grown over time, lots of detectors, scoring logic, mappings, exports, embeddings/semantic search components and methodology in the code. What I’m most interested in with Fable 5 is not whether it writes better features, or is faster or anything like that. I’m interested in whether it is genuinely better at finding structural problems in an existing codebase: architecture drift, duplicated business logic, silent logic bugs, weak tests around critical rules, hidden assumptions, taxonomy drift, output values diverging from source calculations. In other words: not “build this app for me”, but “audit this repo like a very patient senior engineer who understands the methodology.” For those using Fable 5 seriously: is that where it shines? Does it actually outperform Opus/Sonnet/Codex for repo-wide problem finding? And what setups, routines, skills or workflows made the difference? submitted by /u/Stunning-Way-7527
Originally posted by u/Stunning-Way-7527 on r/ClaudeCode
You must log in or # to comment.