mirror of
https://github.com/luongnv89/claude-howto.git
synced 2026-04-26 09:56:01 +02:00
Luong NGUYEN
72d3b016e6
* docs: sync all tutorials with latest Claude Code official docs (April 2026) Update 44 documentation files to reflect the latest Claude Code features from code.claude.com. Key content changes include new slash commands (/ultraplan, /powerup, /sandbox), deprecated command removals (/pr-comments, /vim), corrected skill description budget (1%/8K), new hook events (PermissionDenied, InstructionsLoaded, ConfigChange), expanded Agent Teams section, new plugin components (LSP, bin/, settings.json), and new CLI flags (--bare, --tmux, --effort, --channels). Added "Last Updated: April 2026" metadata footer to all documentation files. * fix(docs): correct env var values and alphabetical ordering - CLAUDE_CODE_NEW_INIT=true → =1 in 02-memory and 09-advanced-features - CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=true → =1 in 09-advanced-features - Fix /powerup vs /plugin alphabetical order in slash commands table * fix(docs): correct env var values in locale files (vi, zh) Propagate CLAUDE_CODE_NEW_INIT=true → =1 and CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=true → =1 corrections to Vietnamese and Chinese translations.
8.9 KiB
8.9 KiB
Checkpoint Examples
Real-world examples of using checkpoints effectively in Claude Code.
Note: Checkpoints are created automatically with every user prompt. You do not need to manually save them. To rewind, press Esc twice (Esc+Esc) or use /rewind to open the checkpoint browser.
Example 1: Database Migration
Scenario
You need to migrate from MySQL to PostgreSQL but want to explore both a direct migration and a gradual dual-write approach.
Workflow
User: Let's implement a direct migration from MySQL to PostgreSQL
[Checkpoint A created automatically]
Claude: I'll implement the direct migration...
[Changes database driver, updates queries, modifies schema]
User: Run the tests
[Checkpoint B created automatically]
Claude: Running tests...
❌ 15 tests failing - connection pool issues
User: This approach has issues. Let's try the dual-write pattern instead.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects Checkpoint A, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Now implement a dual-write pattern where we write to both databases
Claude: I'll implement dual-write migration...
[Implements dual-write layer, gradual migration strategy]
User: Run the tests
Claude: Running tests...
✅ All tests passing
User: The dual-write approach is clearly safer. Let's commit this.
Example 2: Performance Optimization
Scenario
Multiple performance optimization strategies to try.
Workflow
User: Let's optimize the API response time. Current: 450ms
[Checkpoint "Baseline" created automatically]
Claude: I'll add database query caching...
[Implements Redis caching]
User: Run performance tests
Claude: Results: 280ms average response time (38% improvement)
User: Let me try a different approach.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Baseline" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Try database query optimization instead
Claude: I'll optimize database queries...
[Adds indexes, optimizes N+1 queries]
User: Run performance tests
Claude: Results: 180ms average response time (60% improvement)
User: Let me also try a third approach.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Baseline" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Try response compression and CDN
Claude: I'll add compression and CDN...
[Implements gzip, sets up CDN]
User: Run performance tests
Claude: Results: 320ms average response time (29% improvement)
User: Query optimization was the best. Let me go back and combine it with caching.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects the checkpoint after query optimization, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Now add Redis caching on top of these optimized queries
Claude: [Adds Redis caching on top of optimized queries]
User: Run performance tests
Claude: Results: 95ms average response time (79% improvement) 🎉
User: Perfect! This is the winner. Let's commit this.
Example 3: UI/UX Iteration
Scenario
Trying different layouts for a dashboard.
Workflow
User: Let's redesign the dashboard with a sidebar layout
[Checkpoint "Start" created automatically]
Claude: [Implements sidebar layout]
User: Show me a screenshot
Claude: [Shows screenshot]
User: The sidebar feels cramped. Let's try a top navigation instead.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Start" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Try a top navigation layout
Claude: [Implements top navigation]
User: Show me a screenshot
Claude: [Shows screenshot]
User: Better, but let's try a card-based grid layout
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Start" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Try a card-based grid layout
Claude: [Implements card grid]
User: Show me a screenshot
Claude: [Shows screenshot]
User: This is great! But can we combine the top nav with the card grid?
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects the checkpoint after the card grid, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Add top navigation to the card grid layout
Claude: [Adds top navigation to card grid]
User: Perfect! This is the final design.
Example 4: Debugging Session
Scenario
Hunting down a tricky bug with multiple hypotheses.
Workflow
User: There's a memory leak in the application
[Checkpoint "Before debugging" created automatically]
Claude: Let me investigate...
[Analyzes code]
User: I think it's in the event listeners. Let's fix those.
Claude: [Fixes event listener cleanup]
User: Run memory profiler
Claude: Still leaking memory - event listeners weren't the issue
User: Let me go back and try a different hypothesis.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Before debugging" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Maybe it's the database connections?
Claude: [Implements connection pooling fixes]
User: Run memory profiler
Claude: Still leaking - not the connections either
User: Let me go back and try another angle.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Before debugging" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Let's check for circular references
Claude: [Finds and fixes circular references in cache]
User: Run memory profiler
Claude: ✅ Memory leak fixed! The circular references in the caching layer were the culprit.
User: Excellent! Let's commit this fix.
Example 5: API Design Evolution
Scenario
Designing a REST API with multiple iterations.
Workflow
User: Create a REST API for our blog platform
[Checkpoint "Before API design" created automatically]
Claude: [Creates basic CRUD API]
User: This is too simple. Let's add pagination and filtering
Claude: [Adds pagination and filtering]
User: We need better resource relationships
Claude: [Implements HATEOAS links]
User: Actually, let's try GraphQL instead of REST
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Before API design" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Implement a GraphQL API for our blog platform instead
Claude: [Implements GraphQL API]
User: I think REST is better for our use case.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects the checkpoint after HATEOAS, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Let's finalize the REST approach.
Example 6: Configuration Management
Scenario
Testing different configuration approaches.
Workflow
User: Move configuration to environment variables
[Checkpoint "Original config" created automatically]
Claude: [Implements env var configuration]
User: Test in development
Claude: Works locally but deployment issues in production
User: Let me try a different approach.
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects "Original config" checkpoint, chooses "Restore code and conversation"]
User: Try a config file approach with validation
Claude: [Implements YAML config with JSON schema validation]
User: Test in development
Claude: ✅ Works well, good validation errors
User: Can we also support env vars for sensitive values?
Claude: [Adds env var override for secrets]
User: Test deployment
Claude: ✅ All environments working correctly
User: Perfect! This is production-ready.
Example 7: Test Strategy
Scenario
Implementing comprehensive testing.
Workflow
User: Add unit tests for the auth module
[Checkpoint created automatically]
Claude: [Adds Jest unit tests]
User: Run tests
Claude: 45 tests passing, 78% coverage
User: Add integration tests too
Claude: [Adds integration tests]
User: Run tests
Claude: 89 tests passing, 92% coverage, but tests are slow (3 minutes)
User: The tests are too slow. Let's optimize.
Claude: [Optimizes test setup, adds parallel execution]
User: Run tests
Claude: 89 tests passing, 92% coverage, 35 seconds ✅
User: Great! Now add E2E tests for critical paths
Claude: [Adds Playwright E2E tests]
User: Run all tests
Claude: 112 tests passing, 94% coverage, 2 minutes
User: Perfect balance of coverage and speed!
Example 8: Using Summarize from Checkpoint
Scenario
After a long debugging session, you want to condense the conversation while preserving context.
Workflow
User: [After 20+ messages of debugging and exploration]
[User presses Esc+Esc, selects an early checkpoint, chooses "Summarize from here"]
[Optionally provides instructions: "Focus on what we tried and what worked"]
Claude: [Generates a summary of the conversation from that point forward]
[Original messages are preserved in the transcript]
[The summary replaces the visible conversation, reducing context window usage]
User: Now let's continue with the approach that worked.
Key Takeaways
- Checkpoints are automatic: Every user prompt creates a checkpoint -- no manual saving needed
- Use Esc+Esc or /rewind: These are the two ways to access the checkpoint browser
- Choose the right restore option: Restore code, conversation, both, or summarize depending on your needs
- Don't fear experimentation: Checkpoints make it safe to try radical changes
- Combine with git: Use checkpoints for exploration, git for finalized work
- Summarize long sessions: Use "Summarize from here" to keep conversations manageable
Last Updated: April 2026