6 ms·

> but I finally feel like I'm _good_ at programming, which is insane, because I literally haven't written a line of code myself in months This is exactly the s

• pdntspa 8mo ago
  Because the programming is and was always a means to an end. Obsessing over the specific mechanical act of programming is taking the forest for the trees. I agree with gp that the speed in which I am able to execute my vision is exhilarating. It is making me love programming again. My side projects, which have been hanging on the wall for years, are actually getting done. And quickly! The actual act of keying in code is drudgery for me. I've written so much code in so many languages that it is hard not to hate them all. Why the fuck is it a hash in ruby but a dict in python? How the hell do I get the current unixtime in this language again?!? Why the fuck do I need to learn yet another stupid vocabulary for what is essentially databinding? Who cares, let the AI handle it
  • mkehrt 8mo ago
    None of my side projects are things where I want the output. They're all things where I want to write the code myself so I understand it better. AI is antithetical to this.
    • pdntspa 8mo ago
      All of my side projects scratch an itch, so I do want the output. There are not enough hours in the day for me to make all the things I want to make. Code is just the vessel, and one I am happy to outsource if I can maintain a high standard of work. It's a blessing to finally find a workflow that makes me feel like I have a shot at building most of the things I want to.
      • cess11 8mo ago
        Are these things that no one previously built and published, so you can go and take a look at their implementation?
        • pdntspa 8mo ago
          Possibly. Mostly? I wanted a stackable desk tray shelf thing for my desk in literally any size for my clutter. Too lazy to go shopping for one, and couldn't find one on any of the maker sites, so I had claude write me an openSCAD file over lunch break then we iterated on it after-hours. By end of work next day I had three of them sitting on my desk after about 3 hours of back-and-forth the night before (along with about half a dozen tiny prototypes), and thats including the 2hr print time for each shelf. I want a music metadata tool that is essentially TheGodfather but brought into the modern day and incorporates workflows I wish I had for my DJing and music production. And not some stupid web app, a proper desktop app with a proper windowing toolkit. I'd estimate it would take me 12-18 months to get to a beta the old way, to the exclusion of most of my other hobbies and projects, instead first Gemini then Claude and I managed to get a pretty nice alpha out in a few months over the summer while I was unemployed. There's still a lot left I want to add but it already replaced several apps in my music intake workflow. I've had a number of successful DJ gigs making use of the music that I run through this app. Funny enough the skills I learned on that project landed me a pretty great gig that lets me do essentially the same thing, at the same pace, for more pay than I've ever made in my SWE career to-date. A bunch of features for my website, a hand-coded Rails app I wrote a few years ago, went from my TODO pile to deployment in just a couple of hours. Not to mention it handled upgrading Ruby and Rails and ported the whole deployment to docker in an afternoon, which made it easy to migrate to a $3 VPS fronted by cloudflare. I have a ton of ideas for games and multimedia type apps that I would never be able to work on at an acceptable pace and also earn the living that lets me afford these tools in the first place. Most of those ideas are unlike any game I've ever seen or played. I'm not yet ready to start on these yet but when/if I do I expect development to proceed at a comfortably brisk pace. The possibilities for Claude + Unreal + the years and years of free assets I've collected from Epic's Unreal store are exciting! And I haven't even gotten into having AI generate game assets. So idunno, does that count?
    • hk__2 8mo ago
      All my side projects exist to solve a problem.
    • dolebirchwood 8mo ago
      I have three side projects that revolve around taking public access data from shitty, barely usable local government websites, and then using that data to build more intuitive and useful UIs around them. They're portfolio pieces, but also a public service. I already know how to build all of these systems manually, but I have better things to do. So, hell yeah I'm just going to prompt my way to output. If the code works, I don't care how it was written, and neither do the members of my community who use my free sites.
      • duskdozer 8mo ago
        >If the code works, I don't care how it was written This doesn't concern you for something you're presenting as a portfolio piece?
        • kowbell 8mo ago
          Perhaps part of their portfolio is the code they've hand written, and part of it is demonstrating they are able to use this new tool to make something that works (despite how imperfect the tool is, as we see so many people point out)
        • dolebirchwood 8mo ago
          The code is still clean and organized. When I say I don't care "how" the code is written, I mean I don't care how it was generated (i.e., by prompting or by hand -- and I don't do any of it manually anymore). I still care about how it's structured, as a well-structured codebase helps the agents do their job better.
  • bigstrat2003 8mo ago
    > Because the programming is and was always a means to an end. No. Programming is a specific act (writing code), and that act is also a means to an end. But getting to the goal does not mean you did programming. Saying "I'm good at programming" when you are just using LLMs to generate code for you is like saying "I'm good at driving" when you only ever take an Uber and don't ever drive yourself. It's complete nonsense. If you aren't programming (as the OP clearly said he isn't), then you can't be good at programming because you aren't doing it.
    • pdntspa 8mo ago
      I'm still reading the code, I'm still correcting the LLM's laughably awful architecture and abstractions, and I'm still spending large chunks of time in the design and planning phase with the LLM. The only thing it does is write the code. But that's not programming because its a natural-language conversation?
      • bakugo 8mo ago
        > But that's not programming because its a natural-language conversation? Correct. Programming is writing code. You are not writing code, therefore you are not programming. I don't understand what's so complicated about this.
        • pdntspa 8mo ago
          I'm literally making a program. Present-progressive of the verb to program. I feel like you're pearl-clutching on semantics. By my read, programming != writing code, but writing code is most definitely programming. Oxford defines 'to program' as both.
          • bakugo 8mo ago
            You're not making a program. You're managing the AI that is making a program. You're a manager, maybe a designer or architect too, but not a programmer. These are well defined roles that existed well before AI. You don't get to redefine them just because you feel like you should get to be part of some imaginary "programmers' club" without doing the actual thing that defines the "programmer" role.
  • hk__2 8mo ago
    > The actual act of keying in code is drudgery for me. I've written so much code in so many languages that it is hard not to hate them all. Why the fuck is it a hash in ruby but a dict in python? How the hell do I get the current unixtime in this language again?!? Why the fuck do I need to learn yet another stupid vocabulary for what is essentially databinding? These are the downsides, but there are also upsides like in human languages: “wow I can express this complex idea with just these three words? I never though about that!”. Try a new programming paradigm and that opens your mind and changes your way of programming in _any_ language forever.
  • deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
  • beepbooptheory 8mo ago
    "I really really love cooking. In fact, I have optimized my cooking completely, I go out to restaurants every night!" I believe gp and others just like food instead of cooking. Which is fine, but if that's the case, why go around telling everyone you're a cook?
    • RcouF1uZ4gsC 8mo ago
      But are you doing real food preparation unless you are hunting and dressing the animals and foraging for your own food?
      • r-w 8mo ago
        Yes. You are doing any of the work yourself rather than instructing someone else on how to do it.
        • sebzim4500 8mo ago
          You are doing something, but 99% of the work has been done for you. I guess it's like vibe coding and telling the model to fix issues when you see them.
      • dorkrawk 8mo ago
        I like making pizza ( https://dinosaurseateverybody.com/blog/making-pizza https://dinosaurseateverybody.com/blog/making-pizza )...
      • beepbooptheory 8mo ago
        Ah geeze. I am utterly destroyed by this comment. Will need to sit and think now.
    • pdntspa 8mo ago
      "I thought using loops was cheating, so I programmed my own using samples. I thought using samples was cheating, so I recorded real drums. I thought that was cheating, so I learned to play. I thought using purchased drums was cheating, so I made my own. I thought using pre-made skins was cheating, so I killed a goat and skinned it. I thought that was cheating too, so I raised my own goats from birth. I haven't made any music lately, what with the goat farming and all."
  • bakugo 8mo ago
    Sounds like you just don't like programming. And that's okay! It's okay to not like things. But "I love programming now that I don't do any programming" is an utterly nonsensical statement. Please stop and reflect over what you said for a moment.
    • pdntspa 8mo ago
      Substitute it with "the mechanical act of writing code" and maybe it will make more sense. I have been clumsy with my vocabulary here, forgive me.
• thendrill 8mo ago
  I see alot of people get really confused between the act of writing code VS. programming... Programming is willing the machine to do something... Writing code is just that writing code, yes sometimes you write code to make the machine do something and other times you write code just to write code ( for example refactoring, or splitting logic from presentation etc.) Think about it like this... Everyone can write words. But writing words does not make you a book writer. What always gets me is that the act of writing code by itself has no real value. Programming is what solves problems and brings value. Everyone can write code, not everyone can "program"....
  • bigstrat2003 8mo ago
    Programming is writing code. There's nothing to confuse because that's what the word means.
    • ModernMech 8mo ago
      They're saying writing code is programming but not all programming is writing code. What is Scratch?
      • r-w 8mo ago
        A graphical means of writing and manipulating a program.
        • boc 8mo ago
          Aka Claude Code.
    • simplyluke 8mo ago
      Is it? I wouldn't consider punch cards writing code but they were certainly programming. Programming is a broader concept than code in a text file.
• orsorna 8mo ago
  Well for one, programming actually sucks. Punching cards sucks. Copywriting sucks. Why? Well, implementation for the sake of implementation is nothing more than self-gratifying, and sole focus on it is an academic pursuit. The classic debate of which programming language is better is an argument of the best way to translate human ideas of logic into something that works. Sure programming is fun but I don't want to do it. What I do want to do is transform data or information into other kinds of information, and computing is a very, very convenient platform to do so, and programming allows manipulation of a substrate to perform such transformations. I agree with OP because the journey itself rarely helps you focus on system architecture, deliverable products and how your downstream consumers use your product. And not just product in the commercial sense, but FOSS stuff or shareware I slap together because I want to share a solution to a problem with other people. The gambling fallacy is tiresome as someone who, at least I believe, can question the bullshit models try to do sometimes. It is very much gambling for CEOs, idea men who do not have a technical floor to question model outputs. If LLMs were /slow/ at getting a working product together combined with my human judgement, I wouldn't use them. So, when I encounter someone who doesn't pin value into building something that performs useful work, only the actual journey of it, regardless of usefulness of said work, I take them as seriously as an old man playing with hobby trains. Not to disparage hobby trains, because model trains are awesome, but they are hubris.
  • bluefirebrand 8mo ago
    > Well for one, programming actually sucks Speak for yourself. Programming is awesome. I love it so much and I hate that AI is taking a huge steaming dump on it > So, when I encounter someone who doesn't pin value into building something that performs useful work, only the actual journey of it, regardless of usefulness of said work, I take them as seriously as an old man playing with hobby trains Growing and building rapidly at all costs is the behavior of a cancer cell, not a human I love model trains
    • orsorna 8mo ago
      Your cancer cell analogy is moot unless you paint all AI generated applications to be unusable trash, which is not the case, and I wouldn't describe my own work with it. It's true that standards have dropped to the floor where anyone can "ship" something but doesn't mean it's good. I think I have a better handle on how to steer GenAI versus the average linkedinbro. But the divide between journey and destination is valid, I guess it's something that hasn't been explored until GenAI.
• wmeredith 8mo ago
  I think this is a semantics thing. I feel the same way, but I wouldn't say that I feel like I'm good at programming. I'm most certainly not. What I am good at is product design and development, and LLM tech has made it so that I can concentrate on features, business models, and users.
• MattGaiser 8mo ago
  Different definitions of programming. OP defines it as getting the machine to do as he wants. You define it as the actual act of writing the detailed instructions.
  • bluefirebrand 8mo ago
    It is very difficult to get the machine to do what you want without the detailed instructions If you have an LLM generate the instructions, then the LLM is programming, you're just a "prompter" or something. Not a programmer
    • r-w 8mo ago
      Exactly. There's a probabilistic machine in between you and every instruction that gets executed, without exception. It's straight up different.
      • cgg23 8mo ago
        Im concerned that people are debating over this lol.
• poszlem 8mo ago
  Why do you feel good about programming despite not writing in machine code?
  • bakugo 8mo ago
    False equivalence. x86 assembly is a programming language, C is a programming language, Javascript is a programming language. English is NOT a programming language. If it was, you wouldn't need "AI" to convert English into a real programming language before that, in turn, can be converted to machine code.
    • throwawaytea 8mo ago
      My boss can make people do countless things in the proper order, with just a few words. Sounds like a programming language to me.
  • jlarcombe 8mo ago
    I enjoyed that too when I was a youngster but there are good reasons why it is impractical for day to day work.
• throwawaytea 8mo ago
  I know how to build a house for the most part. But I don't have time to build a house. If I get a robot someday and manage it daily before I leave for work to slowly build a house, when it's done, I gotta be honest and admit I'll consider myself a home builder. Otherwise, who is a home builder? Very few people do every single part themselves, even if they technically could.
  • jdkdksisn 8mo ago
    [dead]
• reverius42 8mo ago
  This is like saying you can accomplish a lot "in assembly" if you write C++ instead of hand-writing assembly. I think I agree that similarly to "this is not hand written assembly", for the use of LLMs to generate high level code, "this is not programming" is also true. It didn't mean we shouldn't use C++ and stop hand-writing (almost all) assembly. I don't think it means we should't use LLMs and stop hand-writing C++ either.