3 ms·
Aaargh, I hate it when useful terms get diffused to meaninglessness. No, there’s one kind of vibe coding. The definition of vibe coding is letting the LLM write
by wrs 10mo ago
Aaargh, I hate it when useful terms get diffused to meaninglessness. No, there’s one kind of vibe coding. The definition of vibe coding is letting the LLM write the code and not looking at it. That’s what the word “vibe” is there for.
- platevoltage 10mo agoI have no idea why an experienced developer who uses LLM's to make them more productive would want to degrade their workflow by calling it "vibe coding".
- ares623 10mo agoIt’s a chance to become the next Uncle Bob in a new era of software
- exe34 10mo agoyou're still allowed to alternate between letting it do and consolidating, no?
- acedTrex 10mo agono, vibe coding is explicitly NOT looking at the output.
- MisterTea 10mo agoFrom my understanding, the vibe part means you go along with the vibe of the LLM meaning you don't question the design choices the LLM makes and you just go with the output it hands you.
- exe34 10mo agookay so I'm not vibe coding, I'm just writing shittier code than before.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- hackable_sand 10mo agoI'm ngl, when I first heard "vibe coding" I immediately imagined programming from memory.
- parpfish 10mo agoMy mind went… elsewhere. Specifically, the gutter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledildonics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledildonics
- bitwize 10mo agoUnsurprisingly, the Rust community has you covered there also: https://github.com/buttplugio/buttplug https://github.com/buttplugio/buttplug https://github.com/Gankra/cargo-mommy https://github.com/Gankra/cargo-mommy (has integration with the former)
- hackable_sand 10mo agoOoooh very interesting
- pessimizer 10mo ago> Aaargh, I hate it when useful terms get diffused to meaninglessness. I think that when you say this, you have an obligation to explain how the term "vibe coding" is useful, and is only useful by the definition that you've become attached to. I think that the author is accepting that there's no such thing as the vibe coding that you've defined (except for very short and very simple scripts), and that in all other cases of "vibe coding" there will be a back and forth between you and the machine where you decide whether what it has done has satisfied your requirements. Then they arbitrarily distinguish between two levels of doing that: one where you never let the LLM out of the yard, and the other where you let the LLM run around the neighborhood until it gets tired and comes back. I think that's a useful distinction, and I think that the blog makes a good case for it being a useful distinction. I don't find your comment useful, or the strictness of definition that it demands. It's unrealistic. Nobody is asking an LLM to do something, and shipping whatever it brings back without any follow-up. If nobody is doing that, a term restricted to only that is useless.
- wrs 10mo agoPeople definitely are doing that. Anyone who is not a programmer and asks the LLM to write a program is doing exactly that. The LLM will do that itself behind the scenes nowadays (yesterday Claude wrote a Python program when I simply asked it to give me the document it wrote in Word format!). References: This is the original definition ("forget that the code even exists"). [0] Simon Willison wrote a much longer version of my comment. [1] He also suggested the term "vibe engineering" for the case where you are reviewing the LLM output. [2] [0] https://x.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383 https://x.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383 [1] https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/19/vibe-coding/ https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/19/vibe-coding/ [2] https://simonwillison.net/2025/Oct/7/vibe-engineering/ https://simonwillison.net/2025/Oct/7/vibe-engineering/
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- doctoboggan 10mo agoI agree with you that there is one original definition, but I feel like we've lost this one and the current accepted definition of vibe coding is any code is majority or exclusively produced by an LLM. I think I've seen people use the "vibe engineering" to differentiate whether the human has viewed/comprehended/approved the code, but I am not sure if that's taken off.
- dbtc 10mo agoIn that case, "blind" would be more accurate.
- francisofascii 10mo agoAt this point I think it is no longer a binary yes/no but rather a nebulous percentage. For example, this codebase was 90% vibe coded, leaving 10% that was edited manually or reviewed.
- brikym 10mo agoIt needs a short concise name. Vibe-cod-ing is catchy. Ell-Ell-Em-Cod-ing isn't.
- christophilus 10mo agoYeah. I agree the distinction is important, but it’s already been lost. Maybe, we need a new phrase to describe “a product you absolutely cannot trust because I blindly followed a non-deterministic word generator.” Maybe, “dingus coding”?