We desperately need some new terminology to describe using LLMs to support development work. "Vibe code" has a strict definition but no one really cares. I have a really hard time believing that the Rust port was 100% "vibed" the way the original definition was laid out.

It's a big slushy of emotions that I understand (both positive and negative) but it makes it so hard to actually tells what problem someone actually has when they just use "vibe coding" as a general LLM usage slur.

I'm using LLMs to assist my development and I'm measurably (in all the ways we engineers could possibly care about) doing better work faster.

Vibe coding indeed originally meant "give in to the vibes [...] and forget that the code even exists."

https://x.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383

In the case of this specific port, the port was done so fast that it is clear humans did not verify the soundness of the translation. It is not clear whether this manual verification will ever occur.

That being said, most software projects were already doing "vibe coding" by Dijkstra's standards long before AI showed up. Going on vibes and forgetting that correctness even exists ;)

Guaranteeing the correctness of complex code is difficult, but it will increasingly become non-optional as we now have a billion hackers in a data center.

---

Edit: "Bun's unreleased Rust port has 13,365 unsafe blocks"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48239790

    I'm using LLMs to assist my development and I'm measurably (in all the ways we
    engineers could possibly care about) doing better work faster.

Writing code is rarely the limiting factor in our work.