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

I know when you're vibe coding

alexkondov.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–178 of 178 posts

Re: I know when you're vibe coding

#171

Post by godelski »

aspenmayer wrote: post #168
godelski wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know what footguns are, though I am using my words in a literary sense, and I think you’re being more literal maybe? This makes no sense to me. They are just different things... and do you think I'm talking about a literal gun? What about a footgun is literal lol I really don't know what you're going on about

I don’t mean literal guns, I mean literary[0] guns. I feel that we agree, as I originally stated in my first reply, so I apologize if you feel that I’ve wasted your time. My goal was to explain why I think that people leave jobs for higher pay instead of fixing things and getting promoted internally, which I believe was what you mentioned, which is party due to dysfunctional workplaces with footguns without proper sa…

I know the difference. You write literal.

  >>> I think you’re being more literal maybe?
I'm saying a footgun is de facto metaphorical so it is a weird thing to accuse me of being literal. I understand Chekhov's rifle is a different thing, and a literally. I literally demonstrated knowledge of this. I literally stated as such

  >> Checkhov's rifle is a foreshadowing device

Re: I know when you're vibe coding

#172

Post by aspenmayer »

godelski wrote: post #171
aspenmayer wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t mean literal guns, I mean literary[0] guns. I feel that we agree, as I originally stated in my first reply, so I apologize if you feel that I’ve wasted your time. My goal was to explain why I think that people leave jobs for higher pay instead of fixing things and getting promoted internally, which I believe was what you mentioned, which is party due to dysfunctional workplaces with footguns without proper sa…

I know the difference. You write literal. >>> I think you’re being more literal maybe? I'm saying a footgun is de facto metaphorical so it is a weird thing to accuse me of being literal. I understand Chekhov's rifle is a different thing, and a literally. I literally demonstrated knowledge of this. I literally stated as such >> Checkhov's rifle is a foreshadowing device

I don’t know what to say. I explained my position and you find it lacking. I make no accusations of lack of understanding, I merely lay out my reason for all to critique and correct, and so you may understand my thought process.

Do you think that metaphors can be used too literally? All models are wrong, and some are useful. Let’s not let the perfect allusion, that I didn’t make, be the enemy of the good comparison, that I didn’t (in your view), make. I’m fine discussing my views, but I can’t change what I said originally.

No one is finding fault with you in this thread, least of all me. If you persist in finding fault where I readily admit fault through deliberation, I might be led to believe perhaps you protest too much?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much...

Re: I know when you're vibe coding

#173

Post by mysterydip »

hakunin wrote: post #136
mysterydip wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once inherited a project that had three separate classes for storing time, each with their own methods to convert between each other.

I can think of reasons for this (e.g. storing date/time as it was originally represented 100, 1000 years ago in a historical context vs storing live time for present-day time calculations vs storing non-timezone time for, say, operating hours relative to subject's location), so this statement alone doesn't show fault.

Fair enough. All three were for the same (live, present day) timestamp, and sometimes used within the same function, eg "timeb = timea+timec" where timea would be one class, and timeb and timec would be another.

Re: I know when you're vibe coding

#174

Post by rekabis »

elashri wrote: post #57
lmm wrote: post #26

> Because no one would write an HTTP fetching implementation covering all edge cases when we have a data fetching library in the project that already does that. > No one would implement a bunch of utility functions that we already have in a different module. > No one would change a global configuration when there’s a mechanism to do it on a module level. > No one would write a class when we’re using a functional appr…

To be honest, most of these things can happen for poorly documented large codebase. I work on academic research project that have docs that tells you basically that the code is self documented. And give one or two pages about configuring CMake and build the project and another page on how to benchmark the throughout. But the internal quirks and the expected convention you will need to figure it on your own. New peopl…

> I work on academic research project that have docs that tells you basically that the code is self documented.

Oh, that is just evil.

Re: I know when you're vibe coding

#176

Post by nickm12 »

devnullbrain wrote: post #62
nickm12 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a false analogy. LLMs do not "compile" natural language to high level code in the same way that a compiler or interpreter implements a high-level programming language in terms of machine instructions (or, for that matter, how a CPU implements machine instructions in hardware). Programming and machine languages aim for a precise and unambiguous semantics, such that it's meaningful to talk about things like whe…

This is a false interpretation, you've put "compile" in quotes when it doesn't appear in the parent comment and the actual phrasing used is more correct.

The parent comment was talking about the "abstraction offered by compiled languages over assembly". I quote an alternate form of "compiled" from that sentence.

Re: I know when you're vibe coding

#178

Post by chilldsgn »

scrapheap wrote: post #66
chilldsgn wrote: post #39

heck, I'm sitting in a team with a code base so full of slop that was written by humans, the AI can't even fix it and I'm burned out from trying to make it better. and I get told to be quiet about code standards because the team is still learning.

I hope you responded with "The team is still learning, which is exactly why I shouldn't be quiet about code standards."

I wish I did, what a great response.
Post reply on HN