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

“Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

cendyne.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 312 posts

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#281

Post by ModernMech »

mentos wrote: post #139
dr_dshiv wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vibe coding is 100% real. Or maybe we should call it code vibing when there is no coding ability. But I just taught 18 professionals with no coding ability to build functional software. Their minds were blown

Cursor? I finally got around to trying it this week and it exceeded my expectations.

What were your expectations and how did it exceed them?

I have to say, on they basis of your comment I just decided to try Cursor, and I'm sorry to report it immediately disappointed me.

First thing it did was it told me it found a syntax error in code that compiles perfectly. It went ahead and added a closing brace, telling me that "I've fixed the issue by properly closing the method with its brace. The method now has valid syntax and should compile correctly".

It was never broken! This seems like such a regression of tooling; we have parsers for the purpose of finding wrong syntax, and they don't just make up things like missing braces that aren't missing, and then break your code by inserting them. This seems like developing in Kafka's nightmares.

Should I even bother continuing to evaluate Cursor, when it can take perfectly valid and correct code, and immediately make it worse? What other nightmares will it reveal to me, and do I even want to know? I'm kind of astounded at how bad that first impression was, couldn't have been worse really.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#282

Post by ModernMech »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #264
Panzer04 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever heard of chesterton's fence? If you don't understand what the code is doing, removing it sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Have you ever heard of shirts? In the past, if you'd tear your shirt, you'd spend time mending it, or pay someone to do it for you. Today, you just throw it in the trash and buy a new one, as it's much cheaper and faster. Think of any other goods we don't repair anymore. Regardless of their internal complexity and beauty of engineering, and no matter how small the defect is, if it's cheaper to replace it wholesale th…

That's only cheaper because we've made it someone else's problem. Someone is paying that cost -- fast fashion is a real issue that causes waste, pollution, and human rights violations. Now as we face tarriffs on foreign manufactured goods, things don't seem so cheap anymore. Mending socks looks a little better.

You're right, there's no reason to believe the same won't happen to code, but there's also no reason to believe it won't similarly end in all kinds of problems that come back to bite us down the line when the goodtimes are over.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#283

Post by BowBun »

clvx wrote: post #30

> For now, they are worth evaluating and discussing, but are not ready for us to delegate the precise task of creating reliable, secure, and scalable software that powers our society. The good thing about vive coding is it avoids the software development lifecycle completely from the user perspective in a platform that has an integrated SDLC which means from defining idea to ensure visibility in changes to a runtime…

The thing is the SDLC exists to harden software to a point where you can run a business on it. It didn't appear because people were bored. This feels more like a comparison to a Figma or other prototyping tool than something that can produce quality software.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#284

Post by owebmaster »

axegon_ wrote: post #270
dragonelite wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% mark means you just finished the happy flow and written 30% of the code bases. Now you need to handle the unhappy parts and need to write extra test code for covering all those edge cases.

Precisely, now you need to finish off the remaining 70%, which is where most of the work that is required truly lies, with or without all the AI bollocks. Whether it takes 2 or 8 days of work to get those 30% done, it's not much of a difference if you need several months(or in some cases years) to get a project to a tolerable "production" state. I'd much rather spend 8, as opposed to an AI-generated codebase which wi…

The alternative to using AI to generate 80% of the project (30% of the code) isn't much better: coding the initial 30%, which is also a challenge (from 0 to 1).

So there is still a productivity gain for senior developers.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#285

Post by c0redump »

bobxmax wrote: post #274
jimsmart wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, I'm a developer. It's interesting that you describe yourself as a developer now. Because just three months ago, in your first post [1] to HN, you said: > I'm somewhat non-technical but I've been using Claude to hack MVPs together for months now. Sure: you might feel as though you have now 10x'ed yourself. But, quite honestly, when the reality is that just a few months back you self-described as "somewhat non-t…

Yeah I was a jr developer for a year before I became a PM. That's the definition of being "somewhat non-technical" as I put it. you've been a developer for some decades which is why your reality is threatened that your craft is increasingly becoming irrelevant so you had to snoop my profile to find some confirmation that your reality doesn't get shattered this is nothing new of course. obnoxious neckbeard engineers w…

Just stop talking. You don’t know anything about anything. Loser.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#286

Post by owebmaster »

Hippocrates wrote: post #277
thunky wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The things you mentioned it does well on are things that help you avoid tedium, but I don't think that's what's most important to businesses. The things you mentioned it does poorly at are the things that matter most. To pile on: if a large part of our job is purely mechanical, then there is a bigger problem with our engineering processes and AI can't fix that.

> if a large part of our job is purely mechanical, then there is a bigger problem with our engineering processes and AI can't fix that. It is! And AI is fixing precisely that. What businesses actually care about (well, 99% of them where code is written) is shipping fast and solving the immediate problem, NOT code quality and craft. It goes against what I want to believe as an engineer. Most problems are not new, they…

> shipping fast and solving the immediate problem, NOT code quality and craft

This is also what puts many companies out of business and create huge security issues. If AI is not fixing this but making it worse, then that's not improving software engineering.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#287

Post by owebmaster »

_factor wrote: post #236
DonHopkins wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "I'm not technical" actually mean? It sounds like a euphemism for: I don't want to work hard. I don't care about the details. I don't want to learn new things. I want somebody else to do my homework. I don't want to put in the effort it takes to succeed. I cheated my way through school instead of learning from classes. I've always had everything handed to me on a silver platter, and I expect that to continu…

Or I’m in a different industry and it’s ridiculous to require years of schooling for a skill that’s not my primary interest? Or maybe the numbers looked jumbled and they really didn’t enjoy STEM classes? You sound arrogant. Have you ever paid for artwork? You may not have said “I’m not artistic,” but the same criticisms apply in reverse.

> Or I’m in a different industry and it’s ridiculous to require years of schooling for a skill that’s not my primary interest?

It took me 6 months when I was 10 years old to become technical and create a website. If a 10 years old can do it in 6 months, an adult can do it in 1 month if they work hard.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#288

Post by thunky »

Hippocrates wrote: post #277
thunky wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The things you mentioned it does well on are things that help you avoid tedium, but I don't think that's what's most important to businesses. The things you mentioned it does poorly at are the things that matter most. To pile on: if a large part of our job is purely mechanical, then there is a bigger problem with our engineering processes and AI can't fix that.

> if a large part of our job is purely mechanical, then there is a bigger problem with our engineering processes and AI can't fix that. It is! And AI is fixing precisely that. What businesses actually care about (well, 99% of them where code is written) is shipping fast and solving the immediate problem, NOT code quality and craft. It goes against what I want to believe as an engineer. Most problems are not new, they…

> And AI is fixing precisely that.

I don't think AI is really fixing business problems, though. I think it's only fixing developer problems. And unfortunately nobody really cares about that except for developers.

I just find it sad that instead of focusing on improving how we build things and reducing the need for so much mindless, tedious, repetious, mechanical work, we're content to just build bad things faster with AI and call it a win.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#289

Post by TeMPOraL »

Apocryphon wrote: post #275
TeMPOraL wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when does any business care about "engineering for the long-term"? We, the software engineers, care. The business doesn't. In fact, the industry has systematically been trying to beat the care out of engineers - it's unprofessional to care about the work beyond the point it stops making money for the business. I'm not saying this is right or wrong - but this is how companies roll; if they can fix product issues…

What happens when this leads to high-profile disasters? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43449642

Hopefully it won't. You don't put webshit in control of rockets or cars, and you shouldn't put vibecoded software in control of them either. Programming safety-critical systems is its own thing, and it should be resistant to LLM incursions at least as long as human sign-off is an important part of the job.

Re: “Vibe Coding” vs. Reality

#290

Post by jimsmart »

bobxmax wrote: post #274
jimsmart wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, I'm a developer. It's interesting that you describe yourself as a developer now. Because just three months ago, in your first post [1] to HN, you said: > I'm somewhat non-technical but I've been using Claude to hack MVPs together for months now. Sure: you might feel as though you have now 10x'ed yourself. But, quite honestly, when the reality is that just a few months back you self-described as "somewhat non-t…

Yeah I was a jr developer for a year before I became a PM. That's the definition of being "somewhat non-technical" as I put it. you've been a developer for some decades which is why your reality is threatened that your craft is increasingly becoming irrelevant so you had to snoop my profile to find some confirmation that your reality doesn't get shattered this is nothing new of course. obnoxious neckbeard engineers w…

Ah right, junior dev for a year. Wow, how amazing.

Plenty of room for you to 10x many times over then.

Over the years, I’ve met plenty of folk who have dabbled with software development, before deciding it wasn’t for them - then pivoting to something less technical.

Nah, I don’t feel threatened at all by AI. My job is secure. Tools change, sure. But there’s plenty of years left in software development for sufficiently skilled humans. No matter what a junior-level dev / AI evangelist might claim.

I’ll be cleaning up and properly re-implementing the MVPs that less knowledgeable folk are throwing together, slap dash. For a long while yet. And doing other stuff that AI simply can’t do properly - and quite honestly is quite far from doing.

Your rhetoric betrays your knowledge, and your bravado and insults can’t make up for that in any way.

It’s easy to get enchanted by current generative AI, and believe it far more capable than it is. Particularly if not overly skilled in whatever domain. Particularly if one doesn’t have much of a grasp on how generative AI actually works. Good luck with that.

Post reply on HN