And then more hours cleaning it up and re-prompting.

Why not just write the code yourself? To me it seems like methodically constructing the pull request by hand is probably faster than lazily prompting and re-prompting.

▲

denkmoon 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

because my manager will ping me and say "anon you aren't prompting enough" like they never heard of Goodhart's law before.

▲

jdw64 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Writing code directly takes longer to warm up. Usually, I'd keep tens of thousands of lines in my head. In the past, I spent a lot of time designing error propagation and execution contexts. (Talented people might figure it out right away, but unfortunately I don't have that kind of talent.) So I'd have to think about things like Result<T> and how far to propagate errors—and worry about whether my approach would conflict with the existing codebase.

But these days, AI just generates code following the existing patterns of the codebase. In the past, staring at a blank screen meant going through a checklist of things to design—starting from policies and writing everything down step by step. Now, I just ask AI and it gives me a template—which is great. Then if the AI makes a mistake, I fix it manually.

Of course, I still hand-code sometimes—but only in the areas I enjoy. Most of the time, I use AI coding. Both are fun, and they complement each other in interesting ways. Doing both together is actually enjoyable.

▲

skydhash 2 hours ago | parent [-]

For me, coding is either a flow state (when I have huge swaths of code to write) or deeply thinking about just a few lines (mostly to figure if I caught everything). The latter case is when I procrastinate the most, because I usually have an idea of a solution, but don’t want to do the work of actually verifying if it’s correct. Using AI then is skipping the enjoyable part (writing the code) to the unpleasant part (formulating hypothesis and verifying them).

▲

jdw64 an hour ago | parent [-]

I feel similarly, but at the same time, I think I am the exact opposite. I actually find formulating hypotheses more fun.

For hobby projects or things I start casually, I usually do not think about errors and such at all. When it is a tool I want to build or need for myself, I really do not care about that part.

In my case, I do not contribute to open source at all. Mostly, I deliver code for factory systems or specific companies, and usually, there are strict enterprise requirements. (To be precise, there is always that mandatory code the lead developer on their end dictates, right?) That kind of code is mostly no fun, but it has to meet their requirements and often clashes with my own style. Having AI write that code for me is a huge relief.

In that sense, I think it is just a difference in personality and preferences. I originally became a programmer because I wanted to make games. I started programming because I found it fascinating to see things drawn and displayed on the screen. Becoming a programmer was all because making Flash games was so much fun... So in that regard, for me, writing code is just 'drawing what I want on the screen', which is why I guess I do not mind if the code is written by AI.

When I contribute to other people's projects, I do not use AI for anything other than English translation, but for my own projects, I have no hesitation.

Is this really just a difference in inclination? It is not that I did not enjoy writing code, but rather that seeing what I want rendered on the screen brings me more joy.

When the concept of 'vibe coding' first came out, I really hated it (since my knowledge was earned over 4 to 5 years of getting scolded by lead developers as a subcontractor and factory software provider). But thinking about it, what I really wanted to do as a developer was just to build the worlds I envisioned, so I decided not to let it bother me too much.

We talk often here on HN, and I really enjoy debating with you. I learn a lot from you.Mr."skydhash", I actually remember you quite often, and I even steal a few keywords from your posts sometimes. Because we have different tendencies, we occasionally clash, but having these conversations is exactly what makes it enjoyable.

Thank you for always replying. Have a great day, and I hope this does not offend you in any way.

▲

skydhash 26 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Is this really just a difference in inclination? It is not that I did not enjoy writing code, but rather that seeing what I want rendered on the screen brings me more joy.

I've been tinkering with things since a very young age, started learning about computers in middle school and really started with programming in college (I had the basics since high school, but I was interested more in 3D modeling). So writing code is more like tinkering for me and I don't really particularly care about the result other than making it happen (correctly). Once it's done, it's no longer a subject of intellectual interest.

So the joy of creating a program is in the creation itself. Once it's done I merely use it (or maintain it if it's part of the work).

I don't condemn AI use, even when doing vibe coding. My main issue is with the hypers stating that it's ok to lower a codebase quality or encouraging recklessness (and the dubious anecdotes) in a collaborative settings. If you can ensure quality and collaborate easily with your colleagues, go ahead. If you can't, then you shouldn't send PRs around.

> Thank you for always replying. Have a great day, and I hope this does not offend you in any way.

Have a great day too. I always appreciate the different point of views on a subject. It's a big world and everyone has their own perspectives.

	▲	jdw64 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>If you can't, then you shouldn't send PRs around. I think this is exactly why our differences emerge. I rarely collaborate with colleagues. In contract delivery work, that is simply how things operate. Usually, after the architecture is divided into modules, I take on the role of implementing one entire area from start to finish. Because of this, I actually have almost no experience with direct code level collaboration. While multiple developers typically share a single code base and constantly exchange PRs, I take full responsibility for the internal implementation within the designed I/O interfaces, which seems to be where our divergence stems from. When the modules are finally integrated, it only becomes a matter of accountability. In that sense, aside from my own website, I might not actually be doing any sustainable development. To be honest, as you know if you try AI vibe coding, the AI's abstraction and my abstraction are different. Because I am not used to its structure, it is not easy for me to manually fix the code generated by AI. Even if I do fix it, I mostly just tweak the surface level. In that regard, I completely agree that there are valid concerns regarding long term maintenance. However, since meeting strict deadlines and ensuring the required behavior are more important to me than long term maintainability, I tend to be more lenient toward AI generation. It seems we reached different conclusions because we operate in completely different domains. It is always fascinating to see how perspectives differ depending on the field when having these conversations. Have a nice day.