| ▲ | Ruby Was Ready from the Start(obie.medium.com) |
| 51 points by thunderbong 3 days ago | 18 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | santiagobasulto an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| I can’t read past a few paragraphs because medium puts an annoying pop up that takes most of the screen and I can’t close. |
|
| ▲ | alfanick 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This looks like babysitting a kid. If that's how CHAT/"vibe coding" looks like - no thank you. I would be frustrated all the time. |
| |
| ▲ | herbst a day ago | parent [-] | | I am super efficient these days. But that's exactly what it feels like. Coding is not fun anymore and needs a lot of stress resistance now. However doing actual manual coding starts to feel weird as well | | |
| ▲ | rmnclmnt 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Coding is not fun anymore The thing that made our crowd apart in the work society is now vanishing, that’s sad. I wonder how future movies will depict programmers: depressed faces getting angrier and angrier chatting with a CLI coding agent! This will not inspire future generations! | | |
| ▲ | rusk an hour ago | parent [-] | | Ever see the Fritz Lang’s metropolis? Like that but sitting down |
| |
| ▲ | bigstrat2003 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You could... not use them. The tool makes you less efficient, it is unpleasant to use... there's no upside here. | |
| ▲ | piva00 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm finding a good balance by only relying on LLMs for the stuff that used to make me stuck because it was just boring to do, the process of reading code, reasoning about it, and designing in my head a solution is still absolutely needed; after that it's quite easy to start hammering out a solution, sometimes I'd get a bit stuck if I noticed it would need some major changes across multiple places, I can let a LLM do that for me and get back on track. What I can't stand even though I tried quite a bit is talking to the damn clanker at length to describe step-wise what I believe needs to be done, and keep waiting, reviewing, telling it what's wrong, waiting, reviewing, I don't think I'm at a stage where I have the mental capacity to be running dozens of clankers at once doing all their changes on their own, and just reviewing later. It's absolutely exhausting and joyless, I've tried, and at the moment it's not for me. | |
| ▲ | wiseowise an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What exactly isn’t fun about coding? | | |
| ▲ | archerx 43 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Well when you’re coding on your own you can get into the zone and just “flow”. With an LLM you’re waiting for the result, you see it has changed things it shouldn’t have changed and while the over all result is a step in the right direction, you have to go back and fix a lot of the LLMs “corrections” which is super tedious. I asked Claude to help me out with an issue I was having with a small renderer I was working on, it fixed the issue but also added a memory leak, the leak was easy enough to fix because I fully understood what was going on but if you’re vibe coding and don’t have the skills to debug yourself you’re going to have a bad time. In the end I don’t like using LLMs for coding but they are good at solving isolated problems when I get stuck. I prefer it when they review my code instead of writing it for me. | | |
| ▲ | Gigachad 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I’ve tried the paid models through GitHub copilot and I just can’t find any of them actually useful for anything more than generating tests. They can generate stuff, but generally I spend so long fixing it manually that it makes the time savings zero or negative. Only thing I have found useful is the PR review bot. That thing is genuinely incredible at spotting tiny mistakes in massive PRs that make your eyes glaze over. |
|
| |
| ▲ | bitwize 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Someone I know who is all-in on AI—the same person who literally said you're not a real engineer if you're not using LLMs—also made a passing remark about how exhausted he was at the end of a workday talking to the clankers. I have a feeling the job's about to get a whole lot shittier. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | andrewstuart 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What’s the message here? I read and read a lot of words but nothing clear came through. Maybe he sort of seems to be saying that Ruby is special in modern programming with LLMs? That doesn’t ring true for me - seems that languages are less special and less differentiated than ever with LLMs, which is to say that languages just tend to be less important now and that’s a good thing. Who cares about language, just build the thing. Is he saying that Ruby is better for LLM programming? That’s hard to imagine because strong typing has to be a big help for automated programming tools and Ruby is behind all the other modern languages on typing. |
| |
| ▲ | bitwize 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not really Ruby per se, but Extreme Programming, TDD, and all of the mid-2000s OO-hipster methodology stuff that accompanied Ruby/Rails back in the day. His thesis is that if you just adopt XP, like you're supposed to, that translates smoothly to programming with LLMs because you can have the LLMs fearlessly take incremental steps, supported by extensive testing, and directly oversee the work exactly the same way you would do pair-programming with a human junior programmer. |
|
|
| ▲ | wiseowise an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What’s worse than snake oil sellers? Snake oil sellers powered by LLM. > Most of all, it promised a much bigger paycheck! Tell us about this part, son, so far you’ve been only spewing same Agile/Xtreme shite we’ve been hearing for decades. |
| |
|
| ▲ | znpy 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Tl;dr? |
| |
| ▲ | felipemesquita 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Author argues that values long embedded in Ruby culture (testing, readability, design) are very useful for collaborating with AI, gives an example os asking Claude to follow tdd | | |
| ▲ | Gigachad 11 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Ruby does have the best testing tooling of any I’ve tried. But I feel like it’s half to make up for how horribly unreliable the language is. The whole thing being untyped makes it borderline impossible to know the code is correct without unit tests covering everything. |
|
|
