> I sit in the middle a lot of the time as my opinion on code quality vary depending on how important the code actually is.

This is really the key insight that most people on the extreme ends of the discussion don't seem to grasp and then talk in absolutisms because they think that their tiny village is the whole world.

It's the same kind of 'extremism' that dominates most discussions about memory safety btw.

For some types of programs, code quality simply doesn't matter as long the program does its job, and generating those programs even with the most sloppiest vibecoding approaches is totally fine.

And in some areas of the industry (like web development) these types of programs are basically the norm - but this sort of code was already mostly hastily cobbled together slop even before AI.

I also see extreme differences in usefulness of LLM code generation. For anything JS or TS it works great because there's a giant corpus. For C code (or even more obscure languages) especially when using libraries which change all the time my experience is totally different (at least for code generation, bug scanning works quite well).

That's my experience so far anyway, literally "hit and miss" with some areas where there are more hits than misses, and other areas where it's the other way around.