677
Vibe Coding (lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] basketugly@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

I have tried vibe coding on a couple small hobby projects and it did not workout in any of the cases, zero out of 4 or 5 ish attempts. It will get you kind of close, but it takes way way too long and it doesn't work so you are actually just getting started. Are there actually techniques to vibe coding or is this all bullshit? I don't want to spend more time looking into it...

[-] Zarxrax@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I consider myself a bad hobbyist programmer. I know a decent bit about programming, and I mainly create relatively simple things.

Before LLMs, I would spend weeks or months working on a small program, but with LLMs I can often complete it significantly faster.

Now, I don't suppose I would consider myself to be a "vibe coder", because I don't expect the LLM to create the entire application for me, but I may let it generate a significant portion of code. I am generally coming up with the basic structure of the program and figuring out how it should work, then I might ask it to write individual functions, or pieces of functions. I review the code it gives me and see if it makes sense. It's kind of like having an assistant helping me.

Programming languages are how we communicate with computers to tell them what to do. We have to learn to speak the computer's language. But with an LLM, the computer has learned to speak our language. So now we can program in normal English, but it's like going through a translator. You still have to be very specific about what the program needs to do, or it will just have to guess at what you wanted. And even when you are specific, something might get lost in translation. So I think the best way to avoid these issues is like I said, not expecting it to be able to make an entire program for you, but using it as an assistant to create little parts at a time.

[-] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago

by "completing it" do you mean having something that seems like it works? Or something that you know works? If it's the former then you've just had the computer do the easy part (creating something) and skipped the actually hard part (making it robust).

Are errors handled properly, is all input being validated? If using https, are you actually verifying certificates? This sort of thing

[-] Zarxrax@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Well since I just program for a hobby, I am able to complete things to the point that they meet my own requirements. If I need error handling for something, I can just ask the LLM to add error handling, it typically works out quite well.

[-] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago

so no. Before llms came around, lots of people were hobby programmers. We learned. Sorry to be blunt, but being a hobbyist is not an excuse. The best programmers I know are hobbyists

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
677 points (99.7% liked)

Programmer Humor

24993 readers
590 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS