4 ms·

>> I fucking hate this. >> And I can not help, but feel dusgust and shame. Is this what programming is now? I love it. LLM assisted programming lets me do thi

>> I fucking hate this. >> And I can not help, but feel dusgust and shame. Is this what programming is now? I love it. LLM assisted programming lets me do things I would never have been able to do on my own. Never a greater leap in programming than the LLM. No doubt the process is messy and uncertain and all about wild goose chases but that’s improving with every new release of the LLMs. If you understand everything the LLM wrote then you’re holding it wrong. I don’t hear developers disowning their work because they didn’t write the machine code that the compiler and linker output. LLM assisted programming is no different. I’m excited about it and can’t wait to see where it all goes.

adamddev1 11mo ago
Compiler and linker output is totally different. Compiler and linker output comes from determnistic, hard-coded logic that you can trust and build on. It's in a totally different category. Compiler and linker output is like trusting well-proven math theorums written in standardized symbols, published in peer-reviewed books. LLM output is like asking random people on the street for random ideas with ambiguous language based on who knows what. The jump to LLMs is in no way analogous to the jump to a higher level programming language.
reeredfdfdf 11mo ago
"If you understand everything the LLM wrote then you’re holding it wrong." If you're using LLM to build production code, then yes, you should very much understand everything the LLM wrote.
- ares623 11mo ago
  Lucky I'm not an SRE!
igravious 11mo ago
I've successfully built projects that I had previously abandoned because the amount of tangential learning required felt overwhelming. With AI assistance, I'm now reaching goals that were once just beyond my grasp, which is an incredible feeling. I think those who dismiss 'vibe coding' haven't tried to use it for something truly beyond their current skill set. There's also an implicit sneer in the criticism—a kind of 'Oh, so you need an AI to help you code?'—that misses the point entirely. [btw: I used Deepseek to reword my original reply :)]

adamddev1 11mo ago

Compiler and linker output is totally different. Compiler and linker output comes from determnistic, hard-coded logic that you can trust and build on. It's in a totally different category. Compiler and linker output is like trusting well-proven math theorums written in standardized symbols, published in peer-reviewed books. LLM output is like asking random people on the street for random ideas with ambiguous language based on who knows what. The jump to LLMs is in no way analogous to the jump to a higher level programming language.

reeredfdfdf 11mo ago

"If you understand everything the LLM wrote then you’re holding it wrong." If you're using LLM to build production code, then yes, you should very much understand everything the LLM wrote.

ares623 11mo ago
Lucky I'm not an SRE!

igravious 11mo ago

I've successfully built projects that I had previously abandoned because the amount of tangential learning required felt overwhelming. With AI assistance, I'm now reaching goals that were once just beyond my grasp, which is an incredible feeling. I think those who dismiss 'vibe coding' haven't tried to use it for something truly beyond their current skill set. There's also an implicit sneer in the criticism—a kind of 'Oh, so you need an AI to help you code?'—that misses the point entirely. [btw: I used Deepseek to reword my original reply :)]