Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

stephenramsay.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 626 posts

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#291

Post by ux266478 »

IshKebab wrote: post #141
jmull wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust doesn't prevent programs from having logic errors. If LLMs produce code riddled with bugs in one language it will do in other languages as well. Rust isn't going to save you.

> Rust doesn't prevent programs from having logic errors. Nobody ever claimed that. The claims are: 1. Rust drastically reduces the chance of memory errors. (Or eliminates them if you avoid unsafe code.) 2. Rust reduces the chance of other logic errors. Rust doesn't have to eliminate logic errors to be a better choice than C or assembly. Significantly reducing their likelihood is enough.

Can these claims back themselves up with a study showing that over a large population size with sufficient variety, sourced from a collection of diverse environments, LLM output across a period of time is more reliably correct and without issue when outputting Rust? Otherwise this is nothing but unempirical conjecture.

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#293

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

stared wrote: post #5

There was a recent discussion, “Why AI Needs Hard Rules, Not Vibe Checks” ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46152838 ). We need as many checks as possible - and ideally ones that come for free (e.g., guaranteed by types, lifetimes, etc.) - which is why Rust might be the language for vibe coding. Without checks and feedback, LLMs can easily generate unsafe code. So even if they can generate C or Assembly that wor…

If it needs that many rules, why use AI at all? Linters pre-exist AI, don't cost money, and don't boil the oceans.

Look at Shellcheck. It turns a total newbie into a shell master just by iteration.

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#294

Post by crq-yml »

I think the main reason not to go full-throttle into "vibes -> machine code" (to extrapolate past doing it in C) is because we have a history of building nested dolls of bounded error in our systems. We do that with the idea of file systems, process separation, call stacks, memory allocations, and virtual machines.

Now, it is true that vibes results in producing a larger quantity of lower-level code than we would stomach on our own. But that has some consequences for the resulting maintenance challenge, since the system-as-a-whole is less structured by its boundaries.

I think a reasonable approach when using the tools is to address problems "one level down" from where you'd ordinarily do it, and to allow yourself to use something older where there is historical source for the machine to sample from. So, if you currently use Python, maybe try generating some Object Pascal. If you use C++, maybe use plain C. If there were large Forth codebases I'd recommend targeting that since it breaks past the C boundary into "you're the operator of the system, not just a developer", but that might be the language that the approach stumbles over the most.

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#295

Post by wouldbecouldbe »

gitremote wrote: post #33

Software development jobs must be very diverse if even this anti-vibe-coding guy thinks AI coding definitely makes developers more productive. In my work, the bigger bottleneck to productivity is that very few people can correctly articulate requirements. I work in backend, API development, which is completely different from fullstack development with backend development. If you ask PMs about backend requirements, th…

The solo projects I do are 10x, the team projects I do maybe 2-3x in productivity. I think in big companies it's much much less.

Highest gains are def in full stack frameworks (like nextjs), with Database ORM, and building large features in one go, not having to go back & forth with stakeholders or collegues.

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#296

Post by remexre »

Yeask wrote: post #255
colechristensen wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking of things that are only real in your mind... Am I outraged? And yes, there absolutely was a vocal group of a certain type of programmer complaining about high level languages like C and their risks and inefficiency and lack of control insisting that real programmers wrote code in assembly. It's hard to find references because google sucks these days and I'm not really willing to put in the effort.

You made it up, that is why you can't find it.

How's [0] or [1] for historical sources?

It's not surprising that Google doesn't turn these up, the golden era of this complaining was pre-WWW.

[0]: https://www.ee.torontomu.ca/~elf/hack/realmen.html [1]: https://melsloop.com/

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#297

Post by keybored »

pron wrote: post #238
gitremote wrote: post #33

Software development jobs must be very diverse if even this anti-vibe-coding guy thinks AI coding definitely makes developers more productive. In my work, the bigger bottleneck to productivity is that very few people can correctly articulate requirements. I work in backend, API development, which is completely different from fullstack development with backend development. If you ask PMs about backend requirements, th…

The thing is that some imagined AI that can reliably produce reliable software will also likely be able to be smart enough to come up with the requirements on its own. If vibe coding is that capable, then even vibe coding itself is redundant. In other words, vibe coding cannot possibly be "the future", because the moment vibe coding can do all that, vibe coding doesn't need to exist. The converse is that if vibe codi…

This is the most coherent comment in this thread. People who believe in vibe coding but not in generalizing it to “engineering”... brother the LLMs speak English. They can even hold conversations with your uncle.

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#298

Post by godelski »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #276
godelski wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to say but to back his claim that he was programming since the 90's his CV shows he was working on stuff that's clearly more than your basic undergraduate skill level since the early 2000's. I'd be willing to bet he has more years under his belt than most HN users. I mean I'm considered old here, in my mid 30's, and this guy has been programming most my life. Though that doesn't explicitly imply experience, or m…

> I mean I'm considered old here, in my mid 30's sigh

But am I wrong? I am joking, but good jokes have an element of truth...

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#299

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

crazygringo wrote: post #126
stared wrote: post #5

There was a recent discussion, “Why AI Needs Hard Rules, Not Vibe Checks” ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46152838 ). We need as many checks as possible - and ideally ones that come for free (e.g., guaranteed by types, lifetimes, etc.) - which is why Rust might be the language for vibe coding. Without checks and feedback, LLMs can easily generate unsafe code. So even if they can generate C or Assembly that wor…

That's a really, really interesting point. It makes me imagine a programming language designed for LLMs but not humans, designed for rigorous specification of every function, variable, type, etc., valid inputs and outputs, tightly coupled to unit tests, mandatory explicit handling of every exception, etc. Maybe it'll look like a lot of boilerplate but make it easy to read as opposed to easy to write. The idea of a la…

So, Eiffel or Ada and TLA+

Re: If you're going to vibe code, why not do it in C?

#300

Post by srcreigh »

chis wrote: post #208
markstos wrote: post #105

I have successfully vibe-coded features in C. I still don't like C. The agent forgets to free memory latter just like a human would and has to go back and fix it later. On the other hand, I've enjoyed vibe coding Rust more, because I'm interested in Rust and felt like my understanding approved along they way as I saw what code was produced. A lot of coding "talent" isn't skill with the language, it's learning all the…

It's really funny how much better the AI is at writing python and javascript than it is C/C++. For one thing it proves the point that those languages really are just way harder to write. And another thing, it's funny that the AI makes the exact same mistakes a human would in C++. I don't know if it's that the AI was trained on human mistakes, or just that these languages have such strong wells of footguns that even a…

I mean, there's C, and then there's C++. I've found AI to be pretty okay at C.
Post reply on HN