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

I'm going back to writing code by hand

blog.k10s.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 656 posts

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#91

Post by bmitc »

mikepurvis wrote: post #52
snowe2010 wrote: post #34

> The other change is simpler: I'm doing the design work myself, by hand, before any code gets written. Not a vague doc. Concrete interfaces, message types, ownership rules. That’s the hard part of coding. If you have an architecture then writing the code is dead simple. If you aren’t writing the code you aren’t going to notice when you architected an API that allows nulls but then your database doesn’t. Or that it d…

I agree with what you're saying, but I think we do have a problem right now with definitions where there's a lot of people basically getting supercharged tab completions or running a chatbot or two in a parallel pane, but still clearly reviewing everything; and on the other side of things is freaking Steve Yegge pitching a whole new editor that lets you orchestrate a dozen or more agents all vibing away on code you'r…

> and on the other side of things is freaking Steve Yegge pitching a whole new editor that lets you orchestrate a dozen or more agents all vibing away on code you're apparently never going to read more than a line or two of

I find it useful to not listen to people who just talk.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#92

Post by seer »

snowe2010 wrote: post #34

> The other change is simpler: I'm doing the design work myself, by hand, before any code gets written. Not a vague doc. Concrete interfaces, message types, ownership rules. That’s the hard part of coding. If you have an architecture then writing the code is dead simple. If you aren’t writing the code you aren’t going to notice when you architected an API that allows nulls but then your database doesn’t. Or that it d…

I’ve noticed that agents almost always fail at the planing vs execution stage.

I follow the plan -> red/green/refactor approach and it is surprisingly good, and the plans it produces all look super well reasoned and grounded, because the agent will slurp all the docs and forums with discussions and the like.

Trouble is once it starts working there would inevitably be a point where the docs and the implementation actually differ - either some combination of tools that have not been used in that way, some outdated docs, or just plain old bugs.

But if the goals of the project/feature are stated clearly enough it is quite capable of iterating itself out of an architectural dead end, that is if it can run and test itself locally.

It goes as deep as inspecting the code of dependencies and libraries and suggesting upstream fixes etc. all things that I would personally do in a deep debugging session.

And I’m supper happy with that approach as I’m more directing and supervising rather than doing the drudgery of it.

Trouble is a lot of my team mates _dont_ actually go this deep when addressing architectural problems, their usual mode of operandi is “escalate to the architect”.

This will not end up good for them in the long run I feel, but not sure what they can do themselves - the window of being able to run and understand everything seems to be rapidly closing.

Maybe that’s not super bad - I don’t exactly what the compiler is doing to translate things to machine code, and I definitely don’t get how the assembly itself is executed to produce the results I want at scale - that is level of magic and wizardry I can only admire (look ahead branching strategies and caching on modern cpus is super impressive - like how is all of this even producing correct responses reliable at such a a scale …)

Anyway - maybe all of this is ok - we will build new tools and frameworks to deal with all of this, human ingenuity and desire for improvement, measured in likes, references or money will still be there.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#93

Post by ozim »

viceconsole wrote: post #60

> Vibe-coding makes you feel like you have infinite implementation budget. You don't. You have infinite LINE budget (the AI will generate as much code as you want). But you have the same finite complexity budget as always. This is a special case of a general fundamental point I'm struggling with. Let's assume AI has reduced the marginal cost of code to zero. So our supply of code is now infinite. Meanwhile, other cri…

I have vibe coded 3 applications I never had time to code but always wanted.

Now it is different in a way where now I don’t have time to use those apps.

That’s a joke.

But I do believe it answers the question of “what to build?”. If you didn’t have time before LLM assisted coding you still don’t have time for it. You most likely know what is used and what not already by heart or by some measurements.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#94

Post by pjmlp »

I am still mostly coding by hand, other than meeting the KPIs of AI use at the company, required trainings, use of agents and whatever.

Eventually like every hype wave the dust will settle, and lets see where we stand.

By now all the AI companies have consumed all human knowledge so they either learn to actually think for themselves, or that is it.

Either way, that won't change the ongoing layoffs while trying to pursue the AI dream from management point of view.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#97

Post by nertirs3 »

TranquilMarmot wrote: post #83
baddash wrote: post #76

I've set a few rules for working with coding agents: 1. If I use a coding agent to generate code, it should be something I am absolutely confident I can code correctly myself given the time (gun to my head test). 2. If it isn't, I can't move on until I completely understand what it is that has been generated, such that I would be able to recreate it myself. 3. I can create debt (I believe this is being called Cogniti…

This is great until the "gun to your head" is your skip-level manager demanding that a feature be implemented by the end of the week, and they know you can just "generate it with AI" so that timeline is actually realistic now whereas two years ago it would have required careful planning, testing, and execution.

I hate this current trend of managers deciding, what tools developers have to use. Hopefully it ends soon.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#98

Post by magic_hamster »

Let me preface my comment by saying I also still write a lot of code by hand - especially when it's something I know I need to understand in depth, and in some cases defend.

With that said, this caught my eye:

> AI gravitates toward single-struct-holds-everything because it satisfies the immediate prompt with minimal ceremony.

This is too general. "AI" is used here as a catch-all, but in fact, it was the specific model under the specific conditions you ran your prompt, including harness, markdowns, PRDs, etc. So it's not fair to say "AI does X!" in this case.

It's also very much up to you. It's very common to have a frontier model plan an architecture before you have another model implement code. If you're just one-shotting an LLM to do everything you get mediocre, more brittle code.

This stuff is still being figured out by a lot of people. But I feel the core of the issue is not using AI well. Scoping, task alignment, validation, are crucial.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#99

Post by ok_dad »

dropbox_miner wrote: post #10
binyu wrote: post #6

> I'm rewriting k10s in Rust. Not because Rust is better but, because it's the language I can steer. I've written enough of it to feel when something's wrong before I can articulate why. That instinct is the one thing vibe-coding can't replace. The AI hands you plausible-looking code. You need a nose for when it's garbage. Isn't Golang relatively easier to read than Rust? I was under the impression that Rust is a mor…

Go reads fine whether the architecture is good or bad, and I couldn't tell the difference until I was in trouble. Rust is harder to read but harder to misuse. The borrow checker would have caught that data race at compile time. I've also just written more Rust. That familiarity matters separately. +1 on Open 4.7 involving the user a lot more. Rn I'm trying to get to a state where I can codify my design + decision pre…

Buddy that k10s code was never good. Go vs Rust is not the issue here, it’s the fact the project was vibe coded without reading anything. It’s hilarious to even think that a god model was caused by anything other than someone who let the bot choose too much.

Good architecture in any language is obvious to someone who is experienced and cares.

Go is actually great for bots to write if you’re actually thinking.

Post reply on HN