41–50 of 391 posts
The productivity drive and the sheer feature set you can generate in record time makes it easy to forget proper sdlc hygiene.
This is legitimately the reason I'm looking to leave programming. I got into programming because the problems of programming were interesting to me. But if the problems go from "figure out why this calculator is off by one in France" to "Get this LLM to stop spamming cutsey emojis", then maybe it's time for a career change.
My latest is, I'm really into fizzy/soda water and wanted my own continuous carbonator. My entire build from water source to tap with an ESP32 controlled pump, pressure, water level, cooling fans.
There were so many areas I made mistakes in my shopping cart and it found it - like Home Brewer likes 8mm lines but water filter systems like 9.5mm. Really optimized the versions from a simple on/off pump w/ float switch to effectively a full on PLC system. So many iterations gained by chatting with "someone more experienced". Once I get the parts I can build and have the software side running in less than an hour.
It doesn't make money, but man I really enjoy it.
Of course if you're supposed to achieve so much output that it's not possible to do anything but vibe it, fair enough.
This is legitimately the reason I'm looking to leave programming. I got into programming because the problems of programming were interesting to me. But if the problems go from "figure out why this calculator is off by one in France" to "Get this LLM to stop spamming cutsey emojis", then maybe it's time for a career change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> generate an uncharacteristically exhaustive suite of unit tests to validate every possible scenario. This is what you want. You want comprehensive tests at every level, far more than is reasonable for a human to build or maintain, from unit, functional, to full end to end and beyond. Adversarial testing (both TDD-style "write tests to demonstrate this bug", and posthoc "prove this patch wrong with a new test") is t…
I see this get mentioned a lot but I still am skeptical that AI can generate tests we can trust more than any other code we know we cannot trust. Yes tests are conceptually isolated and that helps, but I've personally seen unit tests get generated that are semantically incorrect - that is, they test the structure of the code (e.g. they can check function output types and values), but they can't know _why_ the unit te…
I've been burned by this in my honeymoon period with unit testing (pretty much the reason it ended). These days, I prefer broader scope of testing, especially user-facing part. The users may be other developers or end users. I only do unit testing for tricky algorithms or math formulae.
This is legitimately the reason I'm looking to leave programming. I got into programming because the problems of programming were interesting to me. But if the problems go from "figure out why this calculator is off by one in France" to "Get this LLM to stop spamming cutsey emojis", then maybe it's time for a career change.
Giving my "otherside", because the pressure to output more at work is real, but at the same time, out side of work, I love this. I'm able to do way more projects than ever before because a barrier to entry was always the amount of research+time required to start up a pet project. My latest is, I'm really into fizzy/soda water and wanted my own continuous carbonator. My entire build from water source to tap with an ES…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used an LLM to build this https://github.com/dprkh/eventfs It has good test coverage, mostly unit tests but also a number of end-to-end tests. I also made the LLM build a benchmark, which you can find at the bottom of the readme. It is obviously slow, but I thought that it is good enough to work. When I tried to write a 1 GiB file, I found that it broke down, and after writing half the file, the speed went to under…
That's interesting because I would feed that benchmark back into the agent and loop over it, to see how much faster you could get it, and agents are really good at that kind of recursive optimization. And I would definitely add at least a simulated 1GiB write test, probably a real one honestly, if I was building something like that. At least with agent-run tests I care about loop speed a lot, but I care about complet…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> generate an uncharacteristically exhaustive suite of unit tests to validate every possible scenario. This is what you want. You want comprehensive tests at every level, far more than is reasonable for a human to build or maintain, from unit, functional, to full end to end and beyond. Adversarial testing (both TDD-style "write tests to demonstrate this bug", and posthoc "prove this patch wrong with a new test") is t…
100% this is what I've done. I sucked it up and adapted myself to the tool (agents) by having as many implicit guardrails (static typing, functional, no nulls, great linting) and then layering on explicit guardrails (TDD) on top. I also want my workflow to be portable because I don't really trust the frontier model providers. It is different though. Basically a lot of what I do has changed over the last 2 years. I to…
Or people don't want to be reverse centaur keeping the clankers happily running. Instead of helping to solve users/consumers problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In every industry, and we wonder why everything is being enshittified. I'm not looking forward to using computers or technology over the next decade. There is a non-zero chance myself or a loved one is killed because of vibe coding.
There's also a non zero chance that someone in your life is going to have fun and whimsy and their life improved by vibe coding. Why focus on the negative?