• chrash0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    i mean, i’ve done it. there’s always some sort of review process. and if the process is just “wrong, do it again” without examining any piece of it, you’re going to have a bad time producing anything of real value anyway

    • esa@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      if the process is just “wrong, do it again” without examining any piece of it

      that’s the definition of vibe coding. It’s a process where you’re supposed to work as if you don’t know how to code and treat the code as magical mumbo-jumbo.

      • chrash0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        that’s your definition, sure. outputs absolutely have to be checked or the entire thing is objectively pointless, but it’s not. where you want to draw that line is a semantic argument i’m not interested in. but if you submit shit code to my repos and come to me saying, “oh i was vibe coding”, that’s a paddlin