I vibe my way through my ideas. I look at LLM code sometimes to cry and cringe and then I beg LLM to have basic dignity and self respect to write code it shouldn’t be ashamed of. But then I instruct it to do something and it does it with speed I’m never able to achieve, even if the code is ugly. But it works.

▲

varispeed 4 days ago | parent [-]

Works until you discover subtle bugs hiding behind ugliness.

▲

hombre_fatal 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Which is true for human-written code as well.

In both cases, it's your processes (automated testing, review, manual QA) that is the bulwark against bugs and issues.

With AI, you can set up great processes like having it check every PR against the source code of your dependencies or having it generate tests for what's an intermediate step or ephemeral solution that you would never write tests for if you had to do it yourself.

There's this idea on HN that if you delegate too much to AI, you get worse code. Presumably not appreciating all the code-improving processes you can delegate to AI, particularly processes you were never doing for hand-written code.

▲

rebolek 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, there are so many. As in hand-written code. I don’t take LLM written code for granted and I rewrite is sometimes. I know it’s not perfect. But it’s useful.

Compile code is not perfect also. But who does hand-written assembler anymore? Yes, LLM is another layer, it would be ugly and slower but it’s much faster to use.

	▲	varispeed 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		The thing is that with the code you've written you wrote it in a way that you understand and you have mental model of how it works therefore it is much easier to reason about potential edge cases that have not been covered.