• SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        that’s the annoying part.

        LLM code can range to “doesn’t even compile” to “it actually works as requested”.

        The problem is, depending on what exactly was done, the model will move mountains to actually get it running as requested. And will absolutely trash anything in its way, From “let’s abstract this with 5 new layers” to “I’m going to refactor that whole class of objects to get this simple method in there”.

        The requested feature might actually work. 100%.

        It’s just very possible that it either broke other stuff, or made the codebase less maintainable.

        That’s why it’s important that people actually know the codebase and know what they/the model are doing. Just going “works for me, glhf” is not a good way to keep a maintainable codebase

        • turboSnail@piefed.europe.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          LOL. So true.
          On top of that, an LLM can also take you on a wild goose chase. When it gives you trash, you tell it to find a way to fix it. It introduces new layers of complication and installs new libraries without ever really approaching a solution. It’s up to the programmer to notice a wild goose chase like that and pull the plug early on.

          That’s a fun little mini-game that comes with vibe coding.

      • Björn@swg-empire.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Reminds me of one job I had where my boss asked shortly after starting there if their entry test was too hard. They had gotten several submissions from candidates that wouldn’t even run.

        I envision these types of people are now vibe coding.