6 ms·
I tried doing some vibe coding on a greenfield project (using gemini 2.5 pro + cline). On one hand - super impressive, a major productivity booster (even compar
by Scene_Cast2 1y ago
I tried doing some vibe coding on a greenfield project (using gemini 2.5 pro + cline). On one hand - super impressive, a major productivity booster (even compared to using a non-integrated LLM chat interface).
I noticed that LLMs need a very heavy hand in guiding the architecture, otherwise they'll add architectural tech debt. One easy example is that I noticed them breaking abstractions (putting things where they don't belong). Unfortunately, there's not that much self-retrospection on these aspects if you ask about the quality of the code or if there are any better ways of doing it. Of course, if you pick up that something is in the wrong spot and prompt better, they'll pick up on it immediately.
I also ended up blowing through $15 of LLM tokens in a single evening. (Previously, as a heavy LLM user including coding tasks, I was averaging maybe $20 a month.)
- falcor84 1y ago> LLMs need a very heavy hand in guiding the architecture, otherwise they'll add architectural tech debt I wonder if the next phase would be the rise of (AI-driven?) "linters" that check that the implementation matches the architecture definition.
- dontlikeyoueith 1y agoAnd now we've come full circle back to UML-based code generation. Everything old is new again!
- candiddevmike 1y ago> I also ended up blowing through $15 of LLM tokens in a single evening. This is a feature, not a bug. LLMs are going to be the next "OMG my AWS bill" phenomenon.
- Scene_Cast2 1y agoCline very visibly displays the ongoing cost of the task. Light edits are about 10 cents, and heavy stuff can run a couple of bucks. It's just that the tab accumulates faster than I expect.
- PretzelPirate 1y ago> Cline very visibly displays the ongoing cost of the task LLMs are now being positioned as "let them work autonomously in the background" which means no one will be watching the cost in real time. Perhaps I can set limits on how much money each task is worth, but very few would estimate that properly.
- Aurornis 1y ago> LLMs are now being positioned as "let them work autonomously in the background" The only people who believe this level of AI marketing are the people who haven't yet used the tools. > which means no one will be watching the cost in real time. Maybe some day there's an agentic coding tool that goes off into the weeds and runs for days doing meaningless tasks until someone catches it and does a Ctrl-C, but the tools I've used are more likely to stop short of the goal than to continue crunching indefinitely. Regardless, it seems like a common experience for first-timers to try a light task and then realize they've spent $3, instantly setting expectations for how easy it is to run up a large bill if you're not careful.
- eterm 1y ago> Light edits are about 10 cents Some well-paid developers will excuse this with, "Well if it saved me 5 minutes, it's worth an order of magnitude than 10 cents". Which is true, however there's a big caveat: Time saved isn't time gained. You can "Save" 1,000 hours every night, but you don't actuall get those 1,000 hours back.
- grepfru_it 1y agoHourly_rate / 12 = 5min_rate If light_edit_cost < 5min_rate then savings=true
- spicypete 1y ago(from a companies perspective, this is true). As a developer, you may not be paid by the task -- If I finish something early, I start work on the next thing.
- philkuz 1y agoI think that models are gonna commoditize, if they haven't already. The cost of switching over is rather small, especially when you have good evals on what you want done. Also there's no way you can build a business without providing value in this space. Buyers are not that dumb.
- raincole 1y agoThey are already quite commoditized. Commoditization doesn't mean "cheap", and it doesn't mean you won't spend $15 a night like the GP did.
- Cthulhu_ 1y agoEspecially at companies (hence this github one), where the employees don't care about cost because it's the boss' credit card.
- jstummbillig 1y agoIf you want to use Cline and are at all price sensitive (in these ranges) you have to do manual context management just for that reason. I find that too cumbersome and use Windsurf (currently with Gemini 2.5 pro) for that reason.
- BeetleB 1y ago> I also ended up blowing through $15 of LLM tokens in a single evening. Consider using Aider, and aggressively managing the context (via /add, /drop and /clear). https://aider.chat/ https://aider.chat/
- danenania 1y agoMy tool Plandex[1] allows you to switch between automatic and manual context management. It can be useful to begin a task with automatic context while scoping it out and making the high level plan, then switch to the more 'aider-style' manual context management once the relevant files are clearly established. 1 - https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex Also, a bit more on auto vs. manual context management in the docs: https://docs.plandex.ai/core-concepts/context-management https://docs.plandex.ai/core-concepts/context-management
- gen220 1y agoI, too, recommend aider whenever these discussions crop up; it converted me from the "AI tools suck" side of this discussion to the "you're using the wrong tool" side. I'd also recommend creating little `README`'s in your codebase that are mainly written with aider as the intended audience. In it, I'll explain architecture, what code makes (non-)sense to write in this directory, and so on. Has the side-effect of being helpful for humans, too. Nowadays when I'm editing with aider, I'll include the project README (which contains a project overview + pointers to other README's), and whatever README is most relevant to the scope of my session. It's super productive. I'm yet to find a model that beats the cost-effectiveness of Sonnet 3.7. I've tried the latest deepseek models, and while I love the price (nearly 50x cheaper?), it's just far too error-prone compared to Sonnet 3.7. It generates solid plans / architecture discussions, but, unlike Sonnet, the code it generates often confidently off-the-mark.
- BeetleB 1y agoHave you tried Gemini 2.5? It's cheaper and scores higher on the Aider leaderboard.
- tmpz22 1y agoWhile its being touted for Greenfield projects I've notices a lot of failures when it comes to bootstrapping a stack. For example it (Gemini 2.5) really struggles with newer ecosystem like Fastapi when wiring libraries like SQLAlchemy, Pytest, Python-playwright, etc., together. I find more value in bootstrapping myself, and then using it to help with boiler plate once an effective safety harness is in place.
- SkyPuncher 1y agoI loathe using AI in a greenfield project. There are simply too many possible paths, so it seems to randomly switch between approaches. In a brownfield code base, I can often provide it reference files to pattern match against. So much easier to get great results when it can anchor itself in the rest of your code base.
- imiric 1y agoThe trick for greenfield projects is to use it to help you design detailed specs and a tentative implementation plan. Just bounce some ideas off of it, as with a somewhat smarter rubber duck, and hone the design until you arrive at something you're happy with. Then feed the detailed implementation plan step by step to another model or session. This is a popular workflow I first read about here[1]. This has been the most useful use case for LLMs for me. Actually getting them to implement the spec correctly is the hard part, and you'll have to take the reigns and course correct often. [1]: https://harper.blog/2025/02/16/my-llm-codegen-workflow-atm/ https://harper.blog/2025/02/16/my-llm-codegen-workflow-atm/
- rcarmo 1y agoHere’s my workflow, it takes that a few steps further: https://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2025/05/13/2230 https://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2025/05/13/2230
- jessmartin 1y agoThis seems like a good flow! I end up adding a "spec" and "todo" file for each feature[1]. This allows me to flesh out some of the architectural/technical decisions in advance and keep the LLM on the rails when the context gets very long. [1] https://notes.jessmart.in/My+Writings/Pair+Programming+with+LLMs%2C+My+Evolving+Workflow https://notes.jessmart.in/My+Writings/Pair+Programming+with+...
- rcarmo 1y agoYeah, I limit context by regularly trimming the TODOs. I like having 5-6 in one file because it sometimes informs the LLM as to how to complete the first in a way that makes sense for the follow-ups. READMEs per module also help, but it really depends a lot on the model. Gemini will happily traipse all over your codebase at random, gpt-4.1 will do inline imports inside functions because it seems to lack any sort of situational awareness, Claude so far gets things mostly right.
- shepherdjerred 1y ago$15 in an evening sounds like a great deal when you consider the cost of highly-paid software engineers
- echelon 1y ago> highly-paid software engineers For now.
- ipaddr 1y agoThe money won't be flowing forever. This will cost you $6,000 a year.
- shepherdjerred 1y agoA new grad at a FANG costs ~$200k-$250k a year after benefits
- dyauspitr 1y agoI don’t get it? Isn’t it just a monthly fixed subscription.
- metaltyphoon 1y agoFor now. Who is to say in 5 years where everyone makes this THE default workflow things work go up in price?
- Scene_Cast2 1y agoNope - I use a-la-carte pricing (through openrouter). I much prefer it over a subscription, as there are zero limits, I pay only for what I use, and there is much less of a walled garden (I can easily switch between Anthropic, Google, etc).
- dyauspitr 1y agoI’m running o3 dozens of times a day all for the subscription price of $20. Surely this is way more cost effective.
- FeepingCreature 1y agoSame here, same reasons!
- akmarinov 1y ago> I noticed that LLMs need a very heavy hand in guiding the architecture, otherwise they'll add architectural tech debt. One easy example is that I noticed them breaking abstractions That doesn’t matter anymore when you’re vibe coding it. No human is going to look at it anyway. It can all be if/else on one line in one file. If it works and if the LLMs can work at, iterate and implement new business requirements, while keeping performance and security - code structure, quality and readability don’t matter one bit. Customers don’t care about code quality and the only reason businesses used to care is to make it less money consuming to build and ship new things, so they can make more money.
- theappsecguy 1y agoWild take. Let’s just hand over the keys to LLMs I suppose, the fancy next token predictor is the capitan now.
- mattlondon 1y agoNot that wild TBH. This is a common view, and I think will be the norm on the near-to-mid term, especially for basic CRUD apps and websites. Context windows are still too small for anything even slightly complex (I think we need to be at about 20m before we start match human levels), but we'll be there before you know it. Engineers will essentially become people who just guide the AIs and verify tests.
- th0ma5 1y agoHave you ever tried to get those little bits of styrofoam completely off of a cardboard box? Have you ever seen something off in the distance and misjudged either what it was or how long it would take to get there?
- FeepingCreature 1y agoLLMs need a very heavy hand in guiding the architecture because otherwise they'll code it in a way that even they can't maintain or expand.
- jim180 1y agoI've vibe coded small project as well using Claude Code. It's about visitors registration at the company. Simple project, one form, a couple of checkboxes, everything is stored in sqlite + has endpoint for getting .xlsx. Initial cost was around $20 USD, which later grew to (mostly polishing) $40 with some manual work. I've intentionally picked up simple stack: html+js+php. A couple of things: * I'd say I'm happy about the result from product's perspective * Codebase could be better, but I could not care less about in this case * By default, AI does not care about security unless I specifically tell it * Claude insisted on using old libs. When I've specifically told it to use the latest and greatest, it upgraded them but left code that works just with an old version. Also it mixed latest DaisyUI with some old version of tailwindcss :) On one hand it was super easy and fun to do, on the other hand if I was a junior engineer, I bet it would have cost more.
- FeepingCreature 1y agoI think it's just that it's not end-to-end trained on architecture because the horizon is too short. It doesn't have the context length to learn the lessons that we do about good design.
- karn97 1y agoAverage coders, terrible engineers