This is just another insufferable comment in your post history.

I guess my feeling is that formal verification _even in the LLM era_ still feels heavy-handed/too expensive for too little value for a lot of the problems I'm working on.

My observation has been that there are a lot of personal styles to engaging with the LLMs that work, and "hold the hand" vs "in-depth plan" vs "combination" doesn't really matter. There is some minimum level of engagement required for non-trivial tasks, and whether that engagement comes mid-development, at the early design phase, or after isn't really that big of a deal. Eg; "Just enough planning" is a fine way of approaching the problem if you're going to be in the loop once the implementation starts.

This was the bummer to me when I tried it. I liked the bug-ridden classic experience before the notoriety patch.

I recently tried https://www.classicuo.eu/ ClassicUO, and the nostalgia was incredible. Granted it is not playable, but there is something about that experience that all of the assistants, hotkeys, etc. fail to capture.

It's a bad faith question or one so deeply uninformed that parent is correct. It only takes a couple clicks to see the ideas of the people who are "just asking questions".