4 ms·
Unless specific issues have been identified that were introduced by it being "vibe coded", isn't a reaction to reject it outright without actually checking the
by colordrops 5mo ago
Unless specific issues have been identified that were introduced by it being "vibe coded", isn't a reaction to reject it outright without actually checking the ground truth just exhibiting the behavior you are criticizing?
- gpm 5mo agoI don't see any hypocrisy in the comment you are criticizing. The behavior they are criticizing appears to be vibe coding. How is rejecting something for being vibe coding "exhibiting the behavior" of vibe coding?
- sleazebreeze 5mo agoYou aren't allowed to dismiss vibe coded software based on the slop vibes. It must be well-researched and human reviewed in order to have an opinion.
- wiseowise 5mo ago“Don’t like it – don’t use it, nobody owes you anything”, then the next thread “noooo, why have you stopped using it, you must support my slop”. Absolute cinema.
- Bnjoroge 5mo agoThere’s a big difference between vibe coding and agentic engineering. If you think they are at all the same thing, you need to update your priors
- otabdeveloper4 5mo agoNo "engineering" ever stepped foot near that pile of godawful slop.
- solenoid0937 5mo ago> pile of godawful slop. Any software engineer that still rejects the concept of agentic coding is frankly NGMI. If you still see AI this way, you simply never bothered to update your priors, which is just not survivable in this career. I do hope you're already independently wealthy.
- otabdeveloper4 5mo agoOoh, I'm scared. > I do hope you're already independently wealthy. Nah, I'm good. I'll be selling llama.cpp slop to people like you when I retire.
- hootz 5mo agoIt's just a trust issue. Have you seen the absolute state of the Claude Code CLI development? I don't want that to suddenly happen to Bun after I've already used it for production stuff.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- happytoexplain 5mo agoYou want the yt-dlp authors to review the entire post-migration Bun codebase? And what are you referring to as "behavior"?
- colordrops 5mo agoVirtually no one reviews entire code bases of dependencies, what on earth are you talking about?
- ChoGGi 5mo agoThey reviewed it in the sense of integrating something that worked, this is something maybe not completely different but different enough to give pause.
- Bnjoroge 5mo agoDo you review your dependencies’ entire code?
- wiseowise 5mo agoI trust maintainers of my dependencies, I don’t trust Bun anymore.
- majormajor 5mo agoI'm not sure what "exhibiting the behavior you are criticizing" would even mean here. BUT. "Ignore anything but actual problems" is a terrible stance to take generally for software and dependency selection. Incidents are fairly sparse, process is much easier to observe. So if you can find connections between process and incident possibility, that's a very reasonable heuristic. And it's easy to find examples of overaggressive LLM usage introducing problems into software.
- colordrops 5mo agoYou are putting words in my mouth, I never said anything about such a stance. The vast majority of new software is written using AI. The problem is not that it is written by AI, but rather than some people treat it like a black box. It is entirely possible to use AI to write code and verify that it is correct. Even Linus Torvalds is allowing AI generated code into the Linux kernel as long as it's managed properly.
- happytoexplain 5mo ago>The vast majority of new software is written using AI. The problem is not that it is written by AI How on earth does this follow? It's common, so it should be accepted without scrutiny? >The problem is not that it is written by AI, but rather than some people treat it like a black box. Yes, and guns don't kill people. Obviously the issue has two facets. It would be irrational to say "AI is flawless" or "humans are flawless". Allowing genAI code does not imply blindly trusting genAI code. >as long as it's managed properly. Correct. Hence the issue. This was vibe-coding by even the strictest definitions of the term. Vibe-coding is, by definition, not "properly managed".
- colordrops 5mo agoYou are referring to black-box coding, not vibe-coding. There is no strong formal definition of that word. Is there evidence that they just fired off the LLMs and didn't review or test the new bun code?
- layer8 5mo agoThe ground truth is that the new maintainers can’t possibly have a good understanding of the many millions of lines of vibe-translated code. Even assuming that the code happens to work okay in its current state, the lack of understanding means a high risk that its continuing maintenance won’t result in a satisfactory level of reliability.
- rcxdude 5mo agoAren't the maintainers the same people? I haven't seen any talk of who's working on it changing drastically.
- dlopes7 5mo agoNo, would you use a proudly vibe-coded banking app?