←back to thread

Show HN: Pyscn – Python code quality analyzer for vibe coders

(github.com)
136 points d-yoda | 3 comments | 05 Oct 25 13:22 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source

Hi HN! I built pyscn for Python developers in the vibe coding era. If you're using Cursor, Claude, or ChatGPT to ship Python code fast, you know the feeling: features work, tests pass, but the codebase feels... messy.

Common vibe coding artifacts:

• Code duplication (from copy-pasted snippets)

• Dead code from quick iterations

• Over-engineered solutions for simple problems

• Inconsistent patterns across modules

pyscn performs structural analysis:

• APTED tree edit distance + LSH

• Control-Flow Graph (CFG) analysis

• Coupling Between Objects (CBO)

• Cyclomatic Complexity

Try it without installation:

  uvx pyscn analyze .          # Using uv (fastest)
  pipx run pyscn analyze .     # Using pipx
  (Or install: pip install pyscn)
Built with Go + tree-sitter. Happy to dive into the implementation details!
Show context
scuff3d ◴[05 Oct 25 15:17 UTC] No.45482142[source]▶
This is an interesting idea but you might be better off marketing it as a tool for software engineers, maybe to help with old code bases. Or even for someone stuck cleaning up vibe coded nonsense.

Vibe coders don't care about quality and wouldn't understand why any of these things are a problem in the first place.

replies(4): >>45482349 #>>45482429 #>>45483207 #>>45483698 #
CuriouslyC ◴[05 Oct 25 15:45 UTC] No.45482429[source]▶
Vibe coders do care about quality, at least the ones that try to ship and get burned by a mountain of tech debt. People aren't as stupid and one dimensional as you assume.
replies(2): >>45482622 #>>45483402 #
1. flare_blitz ◴[05 Oct 25 17:21 UTC] No.45483402[source]▶
And where, exactly, did this commenter say that vibe coders are "stupid and one dimensional"? Stop putting words in people's mouths.
replies(1): >>45483555 #
2. CuriouslyC ◴[05 Oct 25 17:39 UTC] No.45483555[source]▶
>> Vibe coders don't care about quality and wouldn't understand why any of these things are a problem in the first place.

He literally bucketed an entire group of people by a weak label and made strong claims about competence and conscientiousness.

replies(1): >>45483747 #
3. flare_blitz ◴[05 Oct 25 18:04 UTC] No.45483747[source]▶
That comment sounds pretty benign to me. I also don't know why you're assuming the original commenter is male. The only person in the wrong here is you, and you're wrong twice over.