3 ms·

The limitation is the scope of the problem space; reduce the space and it becomes more reliable. Use the LLM to create independent discrete highly-cohesive comp

The limitation is the scope of the problem space; reduce the space and it becomes more reliable. Use the LLM to create independent discrete highly-cohesive composeable applications (with test suites), use those to compose the business logic, and it will be reliable. So basically microservices (but, actually correct microservices, rather than how most people make them).

0x696C6961 1y ago
That's not vibecoding anymore.
- pc86 1y ago
  True microservices have never been tried.
  - tempodox 1y ago
    Do I smell a true Scotsman here?
    - dc10tonite 1y ago
      Not everyone that smells like peaty whisky is a Scotsman!
  - piva00 1y ago
    Like some bizarro world of Unix Philosophy-esque tools mashed into the approach people have when creating "serverless" applications? Or define what a true microservice is because I think there are many takes on that.
    - pc86 1y ago
      My friend, it's possible you missed the joke.
      - piva00 1y ago
        Oh, I did indeed miss it facepalm.
- 0xbadcafebee 1y ago
  Vibecoding is just not looking at the code. You can not know code, but still know what to ask for. That's already a thing we expect of LLM use; if you don't ask it right, give the right context, etc, it's not as useful. So give it the right architectural guidelines, compartmentalize your use of it, and you'll get good results.
piva00 1y ago
Then we should be seeing something already, this approach exists for many years by the serverless folks. Vibe coding it should be rather straightforward since there's loads of tutorials, example code, etc. available.
surgical_fire 1y ago
The problem of this approach is the problem of "correct microservices". You are moving complexity up from the application layer to the architecture layer. If you ever had to work on "correct microservices", you will know that even for humans it becomes hard to have a mental model and reason about the system as a whole. Good luck having your LLMs tackle it, when at times the best way to describe those services is through diagrams instead of text descriptions.

0x696C6961 1y ago

That's not vibecoding anymore.

pc86 1y ago
True microservices have never been tried.
- tempodox 1y ago
  Do I smell a true Scotsman here?
  - dc10tonite 1y ago
    Not everyone that smells like peaty whisky is a Scotsman!
- piva00 1y ago
  Like some bizarro world of Unix Philosophy-esque tools mashed into the approach people have when creating "serverless" applications? Or define what a true microservice is because I think there are many takes on that.
  - pc86 1y ago
    My friend, it's possible you missed the joke.
    - piva00 1y ago
      Oh, I did indeed miss it facepalm.
0xbadcafebee 1y ago
Vibecoding is just not looking at the code. You can not know code, but still know what to ask for. That's already a thing we expect of LLM use; if you don't ask it right, give the right context, etc, it's not as useful. So give it the right architectural guidelines, compartmentalize your use of it, and you'll get good results.

piva00 1y ago

Then we should be seeing something already, this approach exists for many years by the serverless folks. Vibe coding it should be rather straightforward since there's loads of tutorials, example code, etc. available.

surgical_fire 1y ago

The problem of this approach is the problem of "correct microservices". You are moving complexity up from the application layer to the architecture layer. If you ever had to work on "correct microservices", you will know that even for humans it becomes hard to have a mental model and reason about the system as a whole. Good luck having your LLMs tackle it, when at times the best way to describe those services is through diagrams instead of text descriptions.