11–20 of 388 posts
around a third of senior developers with more than a decade of experience are using AI code-generation tools such as Copilot, Claude, and Gemini to produce over half of their finished software, compared to 13 percent for those devs who've only been on the job for up to two years. A third? I would expect at least a majority based on the headline and tone of the article... Isn't this saying 66% are down on vibe coding?
Is "vibe coding" synonymous with using AI code-generation tools now? I thought vibe coding meant very little direct interaction with the code, mostly telling the LLM what you want and iterating using the LLM. Which is fun and worth trying, but probably not a valid professional tool.
From Karpathy's original post I understood it to be what you're describing. It is getting confusing.
Developers are lazy. Anything that makes development faster or easier is going to be welcomed by a good developer. If you find it is quicker not to use it then you might hate it, but I think it is probably better in some cases and worse in other cases.
I strongly disagree. Struggling with a problem creates expertise. Struggle is slow, and it's hard. Good developers welcome it.
But trying to use it like “please write this entire feature for me” (what vibe coding is supposed to mean) is the wrong way to handle the tool IMO. It turns into a specification problem.
Older devs are not letting the AI do everything for them. Assuming they're like me, the planning is mostly done by a human, while the coding is largely done by the AI, but in small sections with the human giving specific instructions.
Then there's debugging, which I don't really trust the AI to do very well. Too many times I've seen it miss the real problem, then try to rewrite large sections of the code unnecessarily. I do most of the debugging myself, with some assistance from the AI.
I think they're being really loose with the term "vibe coding", and what they really mean is AI-assisted coding. Older devs are not letting the AI do everything for them. Assuming they're like me, the planning is mostly done by a human, while the coding is largely done by the AI, but in small sections with the human giving specific instructions. Then there's debugging, which I don't really trust the AI to do very wel…
I've largely settled on the opposite. AI has become very good at planning what to do and explaining it in plain English, but its command of programming languages still leaves a lot to be desired.
While I'll say it got me started, it wasn't a snap of the fingers and a quick debug to get something done. Took me quite a while to figure out why something worked but really it didn't (LLM using command line commands where Bash doesn't interpret the results the same).
If its something I know, probably wont use LLM (as it doesn't do my style). If it's something I don't know, might use it to get me started but I expect that's all I'll it for.
I think they're being really loose with the term "vibe coding", and what they really mean is AI-assisted coding. Older devs are not letting the AI do everything for them. Assuming they're like me, the planning is mostly done by a human, while the coding is largely done by the AI, but in small sections with the human giving specific instructions. Then there's debugging, which I don't really trust the AI to do very wel…
> Assuming they're like me, the planning is mostly done by a human, while the coding is largely done by the AI I've largely settled on the opposite. AI has become very good at planning what to do and explaining it in plain English, but its command of programming languages still leaves a lot to be desired.