Claude Sonnet Will Ship in Xcode
Original: Claude Sonnet will ship in Xcode
Key topics
The cat's out of the bag: Apple's Xcode 2.6 will ship with Claude Sonnet integrated, sparking a lively debate about AI model training data and the ethics of scraping. One commenter wondered if IDEs could simply "take back" the data by capturing Anthropic's model traffic, but others pointed out that terms of service prohibit this and that companies lack the incentive to break agreements. As the discussion unfolded, it became clear that model distillation and training data sourcing are complex issues, with some arguing that companies are already "stealing" data from each other. Meanwhile, others were puzzled by the limitations of the Claude integration, with some discovering that using one's own API key can unlock access to more advanced models.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
47m
Peak period
66
0-3h
Avg / period
16
Based on 160 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Aug 28, 2025 at 8:44 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Aug 28, 2025 at 9:31 PM EDT
47m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
66 comments in 0-3h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Aug 30, 2025 at 5:06 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
If you can listen to billions of tokens a day, you can basically capture all the magic.
Meanwhile the creative output of humanity is distilled into black boxes to benefit those who can scrape it the most and burn the most power, but this impact is distributed amongst everyone, so again there's little incentive among those who could create (likely legal) change.
DeepSeek is the most notable case, but it's been used lots.
And the foundation model companies are scraping and exfiltrating each others' data.
It's interesting that the highest level of reasoning that GPT-5 in XCode supports is actually the "low" reasoning level. Wonder why.
This is Claude sign in using your account. If you’ve signed up for Claude Pro or Max then you can use it directly. But, they should give access to Opus as well.
One caveman way:
1. Start your project using Xcode, use it to commit to GitHub, GitLab, whereever. In terminal, change into the dir that has the .git in it and launch claude.
2. Teach Claude Code your own system's path and preferred simulator for build testing. From then on it will build-test every change, so teach it to only commit after build passes. (By teach, I mean, just tell it, then from time to time, tell it to propose updates to claude.md in your project.)
3. Make sure before a PR or push that the project still builds in Xcode, if it doesn't, you can eyeball the changes in Xcode's staged changes viewer and undo them. If you change files via IDE, when you're back in Claude just say: I changed [specific/file, or "a lot of files"].
No xproj or symlinks get harmed in the making of your .swifts.
for whatever reason it ignores my directive that it can from the CLAUDE file at least half the time. one time it even decided it needed to generate a fancy python script to do it. bizarre.
https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community
They certainly do, and I can't really follow the analogy you are building.
> We're at a higher level of abstraction now.
To me, an abstraction higher than a programming language would be natural language or some DSL that approximates it.
At the moment, I don't think most people using LLMs are reading paragraphs to maintain code. And LLMs aren't producing code in natural language.
That isn't abstraction over language, it is an abstraction over your computer use to make the code in language. If anything, you are abstracting yourself away.
Furthermore, if I am following you, you are basically saying, you have to make a call to a (free or paid) model to explain your code every time you want to alter it.
I don't know how insane that sounds to most people, but to me, it sounds bat-shit.
Editors are incredibly complex and require domain knowledge to guide agents toward the correct architecture and implementation (and away from the usual naive pitfalls), but in my experience the latest models reason about and implement features/changes just fine.
Why wouldn't it?
I have used agentic coding tools to solve problems that have literally never been solved before, and it was the AI, not me, that came up with the answer.
If you look under the hood, the multi-layered percqptratrons in the attention heads of the LLM are able to encode quite complex world models, derived from compressing its training set in a which which is formally as powerful as reasoning. These compressed model representations are accessible when prompted correctly, which express as genuinely new and innovative thoughts NOT in the training set.
Would you show us? Genuinely asking
It’s happened now that a couple of times it pops out novel results. In computational chemistry, machine learned potentials trained with transformer models have already resulted in publishable new chemistry. Those papers are t out yet, but expect them within a year.
Obviously no model is going to one-shot something like a full text editor, but there's an ocean of difference between defining vibe coding as prompting "Make me a text editor" versus spending days/weeks going back and forth on architecture and implementation with a model while it's implementing things bottom-up.
Both seem like common definitions of the term, but only one of them will _actually_ work here.
Ask the best available models -- emphasis on models -- for help designing the text editor at a structural rather than functional level first, being specific about what you want and emphasizing component-level test whenever possible, and only then follow up with actual code generation, and you'll get much better results.
In Neovim the choice of language server and the choice of LLM is up to the user, (possibly even the choice of this API, I believe, having only skimmed the PR) while both of those choices are baked in to XCode, so they're not the same thing.
Since the landscape of potentially malicious inputs in plain english is practically infinite, without any particular enforced structure for the queries you make of it, means that those "guardrails" are, in effect, an expert system. An ever growing pile of if-then statements. Didn't work then, won't work now.
Your link: "Grade school math problems from a hardcoded dataset with hardcoded answers" [1]
It really is the same thing.
[1] https://openai.com/index/solving-math-word-problems/
--- start quote ---
GSM8K consists of 8.5K high quality grade school math word problems. Each problem takes between 2 and 8 steps to solve, and solutions primarily involve performing a sequence of elementary calculations using basic arithmetic operations (+ − × ÷) to reach the final answer.
--- end quote ---
1. OpenAI has been doing verifier-guided training since last year.
2. No SOTA model was trained without verified reward training for math and programming.
I supported the first claim with a document describing what OpenAI was doing last year; the extrapolation should have been straightforward, but it's easy for people who aren't tracking AI progress to underestimate the rate at which it occurs. So, here's some support for my second claim:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.06920 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.11425 https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06807
Indeed."By late next month you'll have over four dozen husbands" https://xkcd.com/605/
> So, here's some support for my second claim:
I don't think any of these links support the claim that "No SOTA model was trained without verified reward training for math and programming"
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.06920: "We hope this work contributes to building a scalable foundation for reliable LLM code evaluation"
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.11425: A custom agent with a custom environment and a custom training dataset on ~800 predetermined problems. Also "Our work is limited to Python"
https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06807: The only one that somewhat obliquely refers to you claim
You’re just angry and adding no value to this conversation because of it
Otherwise there's VSCodium which is what I'm using until I can make the jump to Code Edit.
If you don’t want to use LLM coding assistants – or if you can’t, or it’s not a technology suitable for your work – nobody cares. It’s totally fine. You don’t need to get performatively enraged about it.
> Built for Apple Intelligence.
> 16-core Neural Engine
These Xcode release notes:
> Claude in Xcode is now available in the Intelligence settings panel, allowing users to seamlessly add their existing paid Claude account to Xcode and start using Claude Sonnet 4
All that dedicated silicon taking up space on their SoC and yet you still have to input your credit card in order to use their IDE. Come on...
They would also need to shrink them way down to even fit. And even then, generating tokens on an apple neural chip would be waaaaaay slower than an HTTP request to a monster GPU in the sky. Local llms in my experience are either painfully dumb or painfully slow.
[0] https://github.com/fguzman82/apple-foundation-model-analysis
When macOS 26 is officially announced on September 9, I expect Apple to announce support for Anthropic and Google models.
It’s the Apple way to screw the 3rd party and replace with their own thing once the ROI is proven (not a criticism, this is a good approach for any business where the capex is large…)
Autocomple is also automatically triggered when you place your cursor inside the code.
Don't be naive.
None of these companies are isolated from the internet.
I spent the last 6 months trying to convince them not to block all outbound traffic by default.
For most corporate code (that is highly confidential) you still have proper internet access, but you sure as hell can't just send your code to all AI providers just because you want to, just because it's built into your IDE.
you can use Claude via bedrock and benefit from AWS trust
Gemini? Google owns your e-mail. Maybe you're even one of those weirdos who doesn't use Google for e-mail - I bet your recipient does.
so... they have your code, your secrets, etc.
But I guess the user could still get a 3rd party plugin.
Also, there are plenty of editors and IDEs that don’t.
Let’s stop pretending like you’re being forced into this. You aren’t.
I do not think this will be an issue for big companies.
There's simply no way to properly secure network connected developer systems.
Wont work by default if I'm reading this correctly
Credit card processing is hard... Go price out stripe + customer service + dealing with charge backs and tell me if you really want to do processing your self.
I always find this article something to get back to: https://www.inc.com/magazine/20110301/making-money-small-bus...
Facebook got excoriated for doing that with Onavo but I guess it's Good Actually when it's done in the name of protecting my computer from myself lol
The real news is when Codex CLI / Claude Code get integrated, or Apple introduces a competitor offering to them.
Until then this is a toy and should not be used for any serious work while these far better tools exist.
Compared to stock Claude Code, this version of Claude knows a lot more about SwiftUI and related technologies. The following is output from Claude in Xcode on an empty project. Claude Code gives a generic response when it looked at the same project:
For example: it uses Haiku as a model to run tools and most likely has automatic translations for when the model signals it wants to search or find something -> either use the built-in search or run find/fd/grep/rg
All that _can_ be done by prompting, but - as always with LLMS - prompts are more like suggestions.
You are free to point Claude Code to that folder, or make a slash command that loads their contents. Or, start CC with -p where the prompt is the content of all those files.
Claude Code integration in Xcode would be very cool indeed, but I might still stick with VSCode for pure coding.
241 more comments available on Hacker News