4 ms·

Ironically, you could probably vibe code your own.

ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago
Do you really think so? Have you ever explored the source of something like: https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community
- PessimalDecimal 1y ago
  Doesn't have to. The LLM will do it! We're done with code, aren't we?
  - wfhrto 1y ago
    Code is still there, but humans are done dealing with it. We're at a higher level of abstraction now. LLMs are like compilers, operating at a higher level. Nobody programs assembly language any more, much less machine language, even though the machine language is still down there in the end.
    - ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago
      > Nobody programs assembly language They certainly do, and I can't really follow the analogy you are building. > We're at a higher level of abstraction now. To me, an abstraction higher than a programming language would be natural language or some DSL that approximates it. At the moment, I don't think most people using LLMs are reading paragraphs to maintain code. And LLMs aren't producing code in natural language. That isn't abstraction over language, it is an abstraction over your computer use to make the code in language. If anything, you are abstracting yourself away. Furthermore, if I am following you, you are basically saying, you have to make a call to a (free or paid) model to explain your code every time you want to alter it. I don't know how insane that sounds to most people, but to me, it sounds bat-shit.
- drusepth 1y ago
  I've worked in 3 different WYSIWYG editors for web and desktop applications over the years, lightly contributed to a handful of other open-source editors, and spent plenty of time building my own personal editors from scratch (and am currently using gpt-5 to fix my own human bugs in a rewrite of the Notebook.ai text editor that I re-re-implemented ~8 years ago). Editors are incredibly complex and require domain knowledge to guide agents toward the correct architecture and implementation (and away from the usual naive pitfalls), but in my experience the latest models reason about and implement features/changes just fine.
rs186 1y ago
Good luck getting just scroll bar right with vibe coding. You'll be surprised how much engineering is done to get that part work smoothly.
- CamperBob2 1y ago
  If enough examples are in-distribution, the model's scroll bar implementation will work just fine. (Eventually, after the human learns what to ask for and how to ask for it.) Why wouldn't it?
  - shakna 1y ago
    Most programs today regularly have bugs with scrolling. Thus, an LLM will produce for you... A buggy piece of code.
    - adastra22 1y ago
      LLMs are not Xerox machines. They can, in fact, produce better code than is in their training set.
      - hollowturtle 1y ago
        That is funny for how much is wrong. Ask the LLMs to vibe code a text editor and you'll get a React app using Supabase. Engineering !== Token prediction
        adastra22 1y ago
        Non sequitur? I have used agentic coding tools to solve problems that have literally never been solved before, and it was the AI, not me, that came up with the answer. If you look under the hood, the multi-layered percqptratrons in the attention heads of the LLM are able to encode quite complex world models, derived from compressing its training set in a which which is formally as powerful as reasoning. These compressed model representations are accessible when prompted correctly, which express as genuinely new and innovative thoughts NOT in the training set.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

Do you really think so? Have you ever explored the source of something like: https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community https://github.com/JetBrains/intellij-community

PessimalDecimal 1y ago
Doesn't have to. The LLM will do it! We're done with code, aren't we?
- wfhrto 1y ago
  Code is still there, but humans are done dealing with it. We're at a higher level of abstraction now. LLMs are like compilers, operating at a higher level. Nobody programs assembly language any more, much less machine language, even though the machine language is still down there in the end.
  - ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago
    > Nobody programs assembly language They certainly do, and I can't really follow the analogy you are building. > We're at a higher level of abstraction now. To me, an abstraction higher than a programming language would be natural language or some DSL that approximates it. At the moment, I don't think most people using LLMs are reading paragraphs to maintain code. And LLMs aren't producing code in natural language. That isn't abstraction over language, it is an abstraction over your computer use to make the code in language. If anything, you are abstracting yourself away. Furthermore, if I am following you, you are basically saying, you have to make a call to a (free or paid) model to explain your code every time you want to alter it. I don't know how insane that sounds to most people, but to me, it sounds bat-shit.
drusepth 1y ago
I've worked in 3 different WYSIWYG editors for web and desktop applications over the years, lightly contributed to a handful of other open-source editors, and spent plenty of time building my own personal editors from scratch (and am currently using gpt-5 to fix my own human bugs in a rewrite of the Notebook.ai text editor that I re-re-implemented ~8 years ago). Editors are incredibly complex and require domain knowledge to guide agents toward the correct architecture and implementation (and away from the usual naive pitfalls), but in my experience the latest models reason about and implement features/changes just fine.

rs186 1y ago

Good luck getting just scroll bar right with vibe coding. You'll be surprised how much engineering is done to get that part work smoothly.

CamperBob2 1y ago
If enough examples are in-distribution, the model's scroll bar implementation will work just fine. (Eventually, after the human learns what to ask for and how to ask for it.) Why wouldn't it?
- shakna 1y ago
  Most programs today regularly have bugs with scrolling. Thus, an LLM will produce for you... A buggy piece of code.
  - adastra22 1y ago
    LLMs are not Xerox machines. They can, in fact, produce better code than is in their training set.
    - hollowturtle 1y ago
      That is funny for how much is wrong. Ask the LLMs to vibe code a text editor and you'll get a React app using Supabase. Engineering !== Token prediction
      - adastra22 1y ago
        Non sequitur? I have used agentic coding tools to solve problems that have literally never been solved before, and it was the AI, not me, that came up with the answer. If you look under the hood, the multi-layered percqptratrons in the attention heads of the LLM are able to encode quite complex world models, derived from compressing its training set in a which which is formally as powerful as reasoning. These compressed model representations are accessible when prompted correctly, which express as genuinely new and innovative thoughts NOT in the training set.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]