5 ms·

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 b

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

mentos 2y ago
Cursor? I finally got around to trying it this week and it exceeded my expectations.
- dr_dshiv 2y ago
  No, if you have no coding ability and no interest in learning but want to just tell the computer what you want: 1. Lovable 2. Bolt.new 3. Replit agent Or actually, I’d put Claude #1. You can make all kinds of cool stuff, just in their UI.
- ModernMech 2y ago
  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.
  - soco 2y ago
    Try refactoring anything in Cursor, that's where the shit really hits the fan. I guess all those folks claiming 100x productivity or applications made with sole vibing, are only building little proof-of concept apps, something which "works" but definitely doesn't need to follow proper requirements. Can it bootstrap an application for you? For sure, but that's just half a day sunk otherwise - all the next weeks of building up on that scaffolding cannot today be automated, or vibed.
    - kuschku 2y ago
      The reason bootstrapping takes a while is to make sure you've got a solid foundation for your project. If you let an LLM bootstrap your project, you get tech debt from the get go. It's costing you more time than it saves.
loloquwowndueo 2y ago
Wait until they have to maintain, debug or secure that software. You’ll see things really blow at that point.
- dr_dshiv 2y ago
  Totally. Code vibing isn’t software engineering. That should be 100% clear.
SJC_Hacker 2y ago
If its something like "tic-tac-toe in Javascript", thats been done 1000x before, I wouldn't find it all that impressive.
- TeMPOraL 2y ago
  Most of webdev has been done 1000000x before. Though to be fair, Wix and Squarespace already bit a huge chunk out of that market.
  - Jensson 2y ago
    > Most of webdev has been done 1000000x before Not according to your very specific stakeholder demands / environment/naming/data tables/data protection requirements, otherwise you would just use a library. Those might seem like trivial differences but plenty of things go wrong there, plenty enough that you can't just use a library instead of a programmer, and then they are plenty enough of such errors that vibe coding will also cause issues.
    - skeledrew 2y ago
      I think the point being made is that even though the specific set of requirements may be unique in a stakeholder basis, all the components already exist, and have been combined in many ways. So it really boils down to prompting in such a way that the right set of components are brought together in the right way. That's where the skill now lies.
      - Jensson 2y ago
        > So it really boils down to prompting in such a way that the right set of components are brought together in the right way. That's where the skill now lies. And how is this different from just calling the libraries in the right way to make it adhere to stakeholder requirements? The statement isn't "its impossible to get an AI to print the code for a right program", but "the work and skills you need to get an AI to print the right program is as much or more than to do it yourself.". That seems to be true for all but trivial programs. Here trivial means you can download a git repo and change some variables to get that result.
arresin 2y ago
> But I just taught 18 professionals with no coding ability to build functional software. Their minds were blown No you didn’t.

mentos 2y ago

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

dr_dshiv 2y ago
No, if you have no coding ability and no interest in learning but want to just tell the computer what you want: 1. Lovable 2. Bolt.new 3. Replit agent Or actually, I’d put Claude #1. You can make all kinds of cool stuff, just in their UI.
ModernMech 2y ago
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.
- soco 2y ago
  Try refactoring anything in Cursor, that's where the shit really hits the fan. I guess all those folks claiming 100x productivity or applications made with sole vibing, are only building little proof-of concept apps, something which "works" but definitely doesn't need to follow proper requirements. Can it bootstrap an application for you? For sure, but that's just half a day sunk otherwise - all the next weeks of building up on that scaffolding cannot today be automated, or vibed.
  - kuschku 2y ago
    The reason bootstrapping takes a while is to make sure you've got a solid foundation for your project. If you let an LLM bootstrap your project, you get tech debt from the get go. It's costing you more time than it saves.

loloquwowndueo 2y ago

Wait until they have to maintain, debug or secure that software. You’ll see things really blow at that point.

dr_dshiv 2y ago
Totally. Code vibing isn’t software engineering. That should be 100% clear.

SJC_Hacker 2y ago

If its something like "tic-tac-toe in Javascript", thats been done 1000x before, I wouldn't find it all that impressive.

TeMPOraL 2y ago
Most of webdev has been done 1000000x before. Though to be fair, Wix and Squarespace already bit a huge chunk out of that market.
- Jensson 2y ago
  > Most of webdev has been done 1000000x before Not according to your very specific stakeholder demands / environment/naming/data tables/data protection requirements, otherwise you would just use a library. Those might seem like trivial differences but plenty of things go wrong there, plenty enough that you can't just use a library instead of a programmer, and then they are plenty enough of such errors that vibe coding will also cause issues.
  - skeledrew 2y ago
    I think the point being made is that even though the specific set of requirements may be unique in a stakeholder basis, all the components already exist, and have been combined in many ways. So it really boils down to prompting in such a way that the right set of components are brought together in the right way. That's where the skill now lies.
    - Jensson 2y ago
      > So it really boils down to prompting in such a way that the right set of components are brought together in the right way. That's where the skill now lies. And how is this different from just calling the libraries in the right way to make it adhere to stakeholder requirements? The statement isn't "its impossible to get an AI to print the code for a right program", but "the work and skills you need to get an AI to print the right program is as much or more than to do it yourself.". That seems to be true for all but trivial programs. Here trivial means you can download a git repo and change some variables to get that result.

arresin 2y ago

> But I just taught 18 professionals with no coding ability to build functional software. Their minds were blown No you didn’t.