You do realize that it's possible to ask AI to write code and then read the code yourself to ensure it's valid, right? I usually try to strip the pointless comments, but it's not the end of the world if people leave them in.

▲

simlevesque 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah but you're leaving out a crucial part: the code is full of useless comments.

That leaves 2 options:

- they didn't read the code themselves to ensure it's valid

- they did read the code themselves but left the useless comments

No matter which happened it shows they're a bad developer and I don't want to run their code.

▲

Mechanical9 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

IMO reading code is usually harder than writing code.

▲

rustman123 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The comments aren’t the problem.

▲

sgammon 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I usually try to strip the pointless comments

You could add your own instead, explaining how things work?

> It's possible to ask AI to write code and then read the code yourself

Sure, but then it would not be vibecoding.

▲

cbsmith 14 hours ago | parent [-]

>> It's possible to ask AI to write code and then read the code yourself

> Sure, but then it would not be vibecoding.

Wait, what?

	▲	sgammon 13 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		AI assisted coding/engineering becomes "vibe coding" when you decide to abdicate any understanding of what you are building, instead focusing only on the outcome
	▲	the_af 13 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Vibe-coding as originally defined (by Karpathy?) implied not reading the code at all, just trying it and pasting back any error codes; repeat ad infinitum until it works or you give up. Now the term has evolved into "using AI in coding" (usually with a hint of non rigor/casualness), but that's not what it originally meant.