Elektrine lite

← Feed

@ricecake@sh.itjust.works

2026-10-31 00:57 UTC

In my experience that’s only been the case for functionally non-unique software. At my job we write software that’s effectively unique. There isn’t a pattern to fall back on. It makes a lot more mistakes very frequently, since the nature of it keeps trying to guide it to the known path. It’s great for debugging since the manner that some check failed is chasing through known logic, and it doesn’t matter that it doesn’t see the existing code as probable or fitting a known pattern if the shape of a switch statement is still the same. In my personal projects I’ve even run into issues getting it to do stuff like vulkan synchronization barriers in a way that doesn’t continuously devolve into what you see in tutorials, with an ultimately unstructured pile of adhoc resource allocation and barriers.

Replies (1)

  • @sobchak@programming.dev 2026-10-31 04:43

    Same, I don’t find “vibe-coding” very useful. It just produces slop. With enough back and forth with an LLM I can usually get something that “works,” but works poorly. I don’t have the motivation to read the slop it produces, so I don’t know if it’s doing things correctly or not (when I do investigate, it often is not). I often feel like the time I spent prompting the LLM in English would’ve been better spent “prompting” the compiler or interpreter in a language designed for software development.

    Open ##5497548