I have done this. It's exactly the reason I went back to doing code review. I don't look at the code with a fine toothed comb, but it does help me catch bad patterns early.

▲

stillpointlab 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I guess the question is: did the project you worked on fail? As in, you couldn't achieve the outcome you were trying to achieve? Or at some point did you sneak a look at the code and recoil in revulsion? What was the failure state?

Was this with the latest models (Fable/Opus 5.5 or equivalent) or an older model in a 3rd party harness?

Are you in the camp of: "if at first you don't succeed, never ever try again".

▲

hn_acct-1029393 an hour ago | parent [-]

Not parent, but project I was involved in was shipped very quickly, had many bugs, and burned a lot of customer trust.

This was a few months ago, so obviously not with the latest models, but:

1. That argument is evergreen. You will always be able to make it, and it doesn’t really add much. It is impossible to refute.

2. Gone back to - when writing code - having a strict mental modal and good control over the codebase. A mix of hand coding (to establish the mental modal) and prompting (for boilerplate). It’s not quite as fast, but the quality is much higher when you mix in using LLMs in quality enhancing capacities (review, debug, etc). This is with the latest model. Hands off still atrophies over time (even the boilerplate), and in some cases is very inefficient (as in wasting my time, nothing to be said about tokens).

> Are you in the camp of: "if at first you don't succeed, never ever try again".

This is great in some domains, but “don’t make the same mistake twice” is much more important in mine. I don’t have the luxury to ship low quality, especially when LLMs make even higher quality so much easier.

	▲	stillpointlab an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I think people are moving the goal post here. My post suggested starting a vibe coded side project, one where failure is low stakes and has no consequences. You are talking about shipping a production system to customers. If you cannot tolerate failure then don't experiment. Don't mix the two.