←back to thread

434 points crawshaw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
kgeist ◴[] No.43998994[source]
Today I tried "vibe-coding" for the first time using GPT-4o and 4.1. I did it manually - just feeding compilation errors, warnings, and suggestions in a loop via the canvas interface. The file was small, around 150 lines.

It didn't go well. I started with 4o:

- It used a deprecated package.

- After I pointed that out, it didn't update all usages - so I had to fix them manually.

- When I suggested a small logic change, it completely broke the syntax (we're talking "foo() } return )))" kind of broken) and never recovered. I gave it the raw compilation errors over and over again, but it didn't even register the syntax was off - just rewrote random parts of the code instead.

- Then I thought, "maybe 4.1 will be better at coding" (as advertized). But 4.1 refused to use the canvas at all. It just explained what I could change - as in, you go make the edits.

- After some pushing, I got it to use the canvas and return the full code. Except it didn't - it gave me a truncated version of the code with comments like "// omitted for brevity".

That's when I gave up.

Do agents somehow fix this? Because as it stands, the experience feels completely broken. I can't imagine giving this access to bash, sounds way too dangerous.

replies(30): >>43999028 #>>43999055 #>>43999097 #>>43999162 #>>43999169 #>>43999248 #>>43999263 #>>43999272 #>>43999296 #>>43999300 #>>43999358 #>>43999373 #>>43999390 #>>43999401 #>>43999402 #>>43999497 #>>43999556 #>>43999610 #>>43999916 #>>44000527 #>>44000695 #>>44001136 #>>44001181 #>>44001568 #>>44001697 #>>44002185 #>>44002837 #>>44003198 #>>44003824 #>>44008480 #
fsndz ◴[] No.43999390[source]
I can be frustrating at times. but my experience is the more you try the better you become at knowing what to ask and to expect. But I guess you understand now why some people say vibe coding is a bit overrated: https://www.lycee.ai/blog/why-vibe-coding-is-overrated
replies(1): >>43999880 #
the_af ◴[] No.43999880[source]
"Overrated" is one way to call it.

Giving sharp knives to monkeys would be another.

replies(3): >>44002194 #>>44002197 #>>44002443 #
lnenad ◴[] No.44002197[source]
Why do people keep thinking they're intellectually superior when negatively evaluating something that is OBVIOUSLY working for a very large percentage of people?
replies(4): >>44002398 #>>44002464 #>>44005289 #>>44008691 #
guappa ◴[] No.44002398[source]
Because the large percentage of people is a few people doing hello words or things of similar difficulty.

Not every software developer is hired to do trivial frontend work.

replies(2): >>44003216 #>>44006810 #
FeepingCreature ◴[] No.44003216[source]
The large percentage of software development is people doing hello world or similar difficulty. "CRUD apps," remember?
replies(1): >>44005304 #
1. the_af ◴[] No.44005304[source]
Hopefully they are not live-coding that crap though. Do you want to make those apps even more unreliable than they already are, and encourage devs not to learn any lessons (as vibe coding prescribes)?