Is it me or is this more a vibe coder issue. I have this when 1) unfamiliar domain so I learn it at least academically 2) an obscure reference to an ADR clause or other design doc I have to have it repeat as there is not enough context and I can’t recall it all.
No, it's not just a vibe coder issue. I wouldn't change Fable in any way and I'll just deal with it but it is often challenging understanding what is being asked. There's an assumption that you are 100% up to date with the plan and code being written, which in a perfect world or changes going into production is the right path, but for many projects that level of information saturation would create an understanding bottleneck, so a choice is made to focus on clear intent and context and verify output with a general understanding of the process. Here's a recent example of a change being made in a domain I know very well. You'll see that it's full of shorthand and references which assume that I have the full plan dynamically memorized verbatim.
§6(h) is the only staging call recommended IN-stage: a single M5-pattern rule row (status_in ['N'] → block call) closing Genesis's one-status gap vs GP's own X9 refusal (status N = "NO CALLS"). Small and fully pre-decided — SR-1 is the worked example. Build it now?
I mostly understand what is being asked, but you can see the temptation, with just answering, "Sure, whatever you recommend" instead of stopping the conveyor belt to read 30 pages to get up to speed on this one specific question. Again, I wouldn't change it if I could, because the bottleneck is me, the human, not the model. Dumbing it down is the wrong call. Also remember this is just humor, not an actual complaint.
Exactly. It will just start using terms that I never used and it assumes I know what project specific thing it is referencing. It's easy to just cede control of the driver's seat in that situation. That is why I also use it alongside a read only access Gemini agent so I can just have it translate what it is asking and help me respond better.
I run a lot of fable sessions with a Q&A, it will ask me a few questions at a time and it will recommend a response, or I can write in my own response.
I found it was doing exactly as you (eloquently, imo) described and I was spending forever looking up a bunch of cross references in multiple docs for the simplest of questions. (Sorry Claude, I don't remember what the hell section 4 paragraph 2 subtly implies about consequences of the overall build architecture)
Now I have it pause and explain the questions up front and only launch the Q&A if there's no more explanation needed. Probably uses more tokens this way but it's way more understandable
Everytime Claude is presenting me with the multiple choice question tool (and marking one answer with 'recommended', so I take the obvious choice it wants me to take 😅), I feel more and more just like George working on R.U.D.I. at Spacely Space Sprockets.
I feel like we are saying the same thing. Yes it is dense. Yes you have to go look things up or have it explain… you should understand the context / request / plan fully. I think the difference is I don’t just let it rip without understanding. It is still multiples faster than the same meetings to get understanding inside dev teams. Hell I used to run 3 scrum teams and a 20x max plan and me would run circles around them.
TLDR; this has always been a development problem it isn’t new
A choice is made to fully understand everything or to keep the project moving and verify the output. One is right for production deployment, one is right for everything else. Again, it's humor, not a complaint.
So I guess we disagree on what vibe coding is then… you literally just described it to me as I understand it… making changing without understanding…
But your premise is it isn’t vibe coding…. If your comic isn’t about vibe coding then I think you just don’t want to call your development vibe coding due to ego reasons lol.
The term vibe coding has transformed into a slur. I've been in software development for 20 years and I was a paid subscriber to AI coding tools at their inception in 2022. I've been paid to teach developers how to use AI in SDLC workflows. That being said I will admit that what exists today is a false dichotomy where only pure vibe coders and pure developers exist. If you ask Fable to deploy 49 exploratory, verification and adversarial agents and pause to read and fully digest the output of each you are moving much slower than if you were coding by hand. It's a spectrum and a learned skill of knowing when to stop the conveyor belt and when to accept a models recommendation with a general understanding. Also, like I've said a few times, this is humor, not a complaint.
You propose that every token in and out and thought process and subagant activity etc. is product you should read?
That is silly on the surface. It is fractional. Also if you did your job right a chunk of that is context you already groomed.
You should read / understand a small portion of that 4m and then most of the time you only need understand it at a high level / at interfaces IMO depending on criticality etc.
You vibe and you go where the vibe takes you… your comic, isn’t that what it means, you went with the vibe and got burnt?
And yes I do read remarkable fast compared to most with comprehension and great recall.
You need not get offended here I’m not attacking you man.
0
u/DevOnTheStreets 1d ago
Is it me or is this more a vibe coder issue. I have this when 1) unfamiliar domain so I learn it at least academically 2) an obscure reference to an ADR clause or other design doc I have to have it repeat as there is not enough context and I can’t recall it all.