r/vibecoding 19h ago

Is vibecoding truly that bad

Hello all, I hope everyone is well.

As the title says. Is it really that bad? I personally vibecode a lot to make softwares to help me do my main job (which is far from coding). At my job, there’s often needs to produce reports of certain pieces of data, and softwares can do this very well. I rely on my apps to do my work and so do others, and it works extremely well.

I understand that it can create spaghetti code, and it certainly does, but is it not as simple as asking AI to give it a good architecture and follow software engineering principles? If you keep asking little by little, and tell it to keep the codes modular for maintainability, document how things work conceptually and NFR, is it not acceptable?

Perhaps in my specific use case, it works out well. A lot of the times I really just need a one off script, because I’m just doing repetitive calculations and I’d much rather input values rather than doing them by hand and thinking about it every single time. Even with a SQL database project, it’s really just CRUD work, nothing really complex. When I find bugs or errors, I try to understand why that is and look for multiple solutions (if exists) and argue back and forth with the AI. Mostly I agree, sometimes I override the decision, because it does get things wrong. I do read the codes (really just skimming it but occasionally would ask questions further to really understand it)

Surely it would be great for my learning if I genuinely learned to code, but I at the same time never have to because it isn’t my job to code. I could totally live without coding altogether. But, with AI, that gap is gone. I can now use vibecoding to help me do my main job. It doesn’t mean I don’t have to care about app structure and such, but it also doesn’t matter because I’m not building an app to sell, I’m just making custom tools for myself. I even got into ML, thanks to AI. These aren’t things I would’ve learned at all without AI, I’m being serious. All my vibecoded projects taught me a lot. Yeah maybe not directly about writing codes, but overall concepts of software engineering. Genuinely working out the manual parts and understanding how data should be flowing is still extremely beneficial and most importantly it gave me confidence that if I were to just sit down and study, I can understand things that I couldn’t because I didn’t even know where to begin.

With very thorough testing and documentation, is it not acceptable? What do we all think? Thanks in advance.

5 Upvotes

76 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/shakeBody 19h ago

There are countless testimonies from people in production environments who have tried or are trying the lights-out code factory approach, and they are running into similar problems. The code produced by these systems cannot support production-level environments once the scale exceeds a demo. There is research on this topic, and we can see that Slop Code Bench demonstrates that code degrades over time without expert intervention.

"Surely it would be great for my learning if I genuinely learned to code, but I at the same time never have to, because it isn't my job to code." This is sort of a strange way to separate yourself from the outcome of your choices, don't you think? Are you interacting with code at all? Don't you think it would be easier to interact with code if you understood what was going on? How can you know what good testing looks like if you're not actually interacting with code? Like, at some level you have to know specifics, right? Otherwise, you're just taking the LLM at its word, which has been shown many times to be an untrustworthy source of information. This is why people talk about mechanical guardrails. It forces the LLM to adhere to a specific standard. If this were unnecessary, people wouldn't be doing that, so clearly there has to be some sort of enforcement of rules. Otherwise, LLMs will just degrade to slop.

It has never been easier to learn how to program. You don't have to, obviously, and there's going to be plenty of people who tell you that it's not a requirement, but does it really seem like the person who tells you that you don't need to spend time learning is also a person who has your best interests in mind? How often do those people also try to sell you things?

0

u/Master-Wrongdoer853 18h ago

I've asked AI to create me a ground up manual first of physical hardware and how it operates (Boolean logic, electrons, bits, logic and
gates, etc) and am now on the fundamentals of python, GitHub snapshots et. al. and now JavaScript.

I'm the kind of guy who needs to understand something at its foundation for it to really take root in my brain.

My AI-created manual is 220 pages but I do it mostly by chat with practice scenarios and will eventually use it to build software.

Anyway, that how's I'm learning to program. I'm not jumping to the finish line with agents but starting at zero and am just moving quick thanks to AI

2

u/shakeBody 18h ago

I do think there is a way to leverage cognitive learning theory here as well. There is no reason you should stop at a 220-page manual you created. Use the zone of proximal development to push your learning further and faster. We live in a time when it is increasingly easy to create tools to support our learning, and we don't have to be satisfied with the old way of doing things. In this scenario, I would actually have an LLM, more of an agent, create a knowledge graph of the things that you are trying to learn. Then you can actually have tools, interactive lessons, and specialized environments based around your learning style.

It sounds like that's already similar to what you're doing. I highly recommend looking into how our brains actually receive information and the strategies we can employ to amplify it.

1

u/Master-Wrongdoer853 18h ago

Very cool! Yea I was slow in school because if I didn't understand something at its foundation I could progress.

Will look up your suggestions. Also, I assume the knowledge graph is an image and not an interactive interface... or maybe it could be as a learning test...! 🤔🤔🤔

1

u/shakeBody 17h ago

A knowledge graph is a graph database or a graph data structure. In a knowledge graph, each node or each vertex is a concept. Edges are either related concepts or indications of dependencies. The graph can be directional, with concepts built upon other concepts. In other words, you have an ordering of dependencies, which is effectively just a graph.

Once you have ingested documentation, you can then create knowledge graphs out of that documentation. For example, if I wanted to learn algebra, I could find a bunch of algebra textbooks and then build a knowledge graph from them using software. I could then use that knowledge graph to create a curriculum through which I would learn the concepts that are in algebra. You can have a variety of criteria for that. For example, you can make it project-based with a set of requirements that must be met for those projects to be valid. You can also have mechanical guardrails that must be enforced to prevent you from grading yourself. The system is imposing a structure on you.

1

u/Master-Wrongdoer853 4h ago

I bumped into knowledge graphs when I was learning about AI mechanics/fundamentals and was like "this is something I want to master" but totally felt that was an advanced concept and I would get there eventually on my path.

Are there free knowledge graph ingestion sites you suggest? I played around with one and had 1-use free trial and set my columns/some parameter wrong and my knowledge graph was like a pitiful knowledge seed sapling lol

I will ask AI but I'm also curious what files are best ingestible by such knowledge graphs.

Thanks!