4 ms·

It’s implied that programs are personal but product code goes through peer review, checking the premise of the change as well as the implementation. When someo

It’s implied that programs are personal but product code goes through peer review, checking the premise of the change as well as the implementation. When someone reviews vibe coded patches and gives feedback, what should the reviewer expect the author to do? Pass the feedback onto their agent and upload the result? That feels silly. How has code review changed in our brave, vibey new world? Are we just reviewing ideas now, and leaving the code up to the model? Is our software now just an accumulation of deterministic prompts that can be replayed to get the same result?

edg5000 2y ago
With the Altair you had switches to input bits of CPU instructions. Then punchcards. Then Telex. Then assembly in a terminal. Then C, Pascal and Smalltalk. Then Java, C++, Python, PHP. Then the mountains of libraries and frameworks, realtime indexers, linters, autocomplete, suggestions. The next step seems that we will write programs in prompts. Maybe we will get a language that is more structured than the current natural language prompts and of much higher order than than our current high level programming constructs and libraries.
- skydhash 2y ago
  You can’t eliminate formalism in programming. You can only abstract it away by creating a metaprogramming layer for the current one. And prompt isn’t that. Prompting is a blind shot hoping to hit something good.
  - edg5000 1y ago
    Indeed, that is why we may end up with some sort of standardized and structured way to write functional descriptions of software that we can train AIs on. How close to natural language it will be I'm not sure. Arguably, since the birth of computing we see programming languages inching ever closer to natural language, albeit still far removed. Perhaps we will end up with something indeed really formal and strict, but much more high-level. AIs could than be trained on the full language; maybe we can then solve the "confident yet wrong" problem with current agentic programming.
constantcrying 2y ago
>When someone reviews vibe coded patches and gives feedback, what should the reviewer expect the author to do? Quit his job or stop contributing. Nobody is helped by people blindly commiting code they don't understand.

edg5000 2y ago

With the Altair you had switches to input bits of CPU instructions. Then punchcards. Then Telex. Then assembly in a terminal. Then C, Pascal and Smalltalk. Then Java, C++, Python, PHP. Then the mountains of libraries and frameworks, realtime indexers, linters, autocomplete, suggestions. The next step seems that we will write programs in prompts. Maybe we will get a language that is more structured than the current natural language prompts and of much higher order than than our current high level programming constructs and libraries.

skydhash 2y ago
You can’t eliminate formalism in programming. You can only abstract it away by creating a metaprogramming layer for the current one. And prompt isn’t that. Prompting is a blind shot hoping to hit something good.
- edg5000 1y ago
  Indeed, that is why we may end up with some sort of standardized and structured way to write functional descriptions of software that we can train AIs on. How close to natural language it will be I'm not sure. Arguably, since the birth of computing we see programming languages inching ever closer to natural language, albeit still far removed. Perhaps we will end up with something indeed really formal and strict, but much more high-level. AIs could than be trained on the full language; maybe we can then solve the "confident yet wrong" problem with current agentic programming.

constantcrying 2y ago

>When someone reviews vibe coded patches and gives feedback, what should the reviewer expect the author to do? Quit his job or stop contributing. Nobody is helped by people blindly commiting code they don't understand.