this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
210 points (89.8% liked)

Programming

26482 readers
265 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

...and I still don't get it. I paid for a month of Pro to try it out, and it is consistently and confidently producing subtly broken junk. I had tried doing this before in the past, but gave up because it didn't work well. I thought that maybe this time it would be far along enough to be useful.

The task was relatively simple, and it involved doing some 3d math. The solutions it generated were almost write every time, but critically broken in subtle ways, and any attempt to fix the problems would either introduce new bugs, or regress with old bugs.

I spent nearly the whole day yesterday going back and forth with it, and felt like I was in a mental fog. It wasn't until I had a full night's sleep and reviewed the chat log this morning until I realized how much I was going in circles. I tried prompting a bit more today, but stopped when it kept doing the same crap.

The worst part of this is that, through out all of this, Claude was confidently responding. When I said there was a bug, it would "fix" the bug, and provide a confident explanation of what was wrong... Except it was clearly bullshit because it didn't work.

I still want to keep an open mind. Is anyone having success with these tools? Is there a special way to prompt it? Would I get better results during certain hours of the day?

For reference, I used Opus 4.6 Extended.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Feyd@programming.dev 156 points 1 day ago (2 children)

producing subtly broken junk

The difference between you and people that say it's amazing is that you are capable of discerning this reality.

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 52 points 1 day ago (5 children)

What I don't get, though, is how the vibe code bros can't discern this reality.

How can they sit there and not see that their vibe-coded app just doesn't do what they wanted it to do? Eventually, you've got to try actually running the app, right? And how do you keep drinking the AI kool-aid when you find out that the app doesn't work?

[–] favoredponcho@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 hours ago

You do try running the app, and then you see what is broken and then you have Claude fix it. The process is still iterative just like regular coding. I haven't met a software engineer that wrote a perfect app the first try, its always broken, even in subtle ways. Why does everyone think vibecoding needs to be perfect on the first shot?

[–] Lumelore@lemmy.blahaj.zone 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Vibe code bros aren't real programmers. They're business people, not computer people. Even if they have a CS degree, they only got that because they think it'll get them more money. They lack passion and they don't care about understanding anything. They probably don't even care about what they're generating beyond its potential to be used in a grift.

I graduated college not that long ago and my CS classes had quite a few former business majors. They switched because they think it'll be more lucrative for them but since they only care about money they didn't bother to actually learn the material especially since they could just vibe code through everything.

[–] b_n@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So much this.

After working in tech companies for the last 10 years I've noticed the difference between people that "generate code" and those that engineer code.

My worry about the industry is that vibe coding gives the code generators the ability to generate even more code. The engineers (even those that use vibe tools) are not engineering as much code by volume compared to "the generators".

My hope is that this is one of those "short term gain, long term pain" things that might self correct in a couple of years 🤞.

[–] sobchak@programming.dev 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

It's insane that companies are going back to metrics like LOC (or tokens generated), when the industry figured out decades ago that these are horrible, counterproductive metrics.

"The hard thing about building software is deciding what one wants to say, not saying it. No facilitation of expression can give more than marginal gains." - No Silver Bullet (1986)

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 36 points 1 day ago

They're the same people that copied code from stack overflow that you had to tell them how to actually fix every PR. The difference is the C suite types are backing them this time

[–] tleb@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Eventually, you've got to try actually running the app, right?

At least at my company, no, they just start selling it.

[–] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

Yes. Exactly. In my experience, there's more code shops that ship shit than that catch their mistakes.

[–] Oisteink@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I do apps that work, i do patches that are production quality. Half the cs world does… I do full stack ai debugging of esp32 projects.

It’s a powerful tool, you just need to learn it’s strong and weak points, just like any other tool you use.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Half the cs world does…

What's the basis for this claim? I'm doubtful, but don't have wide data for this.

[–] Oisteink@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Rough estimate from my personal connections only. Some work places where ai is not possible, but all that have made an effort report good code. You need to work with what it is - a word generator that sometimes gives correct results. Make it research and not trust training. Never let it do things on its own, require a plan and reason. Make it evaluate its own work/plan.

Most issues i have stem from models beeing too eager. Restrain them and remove the “i can do this next…”behaviour.

Context is king - so proper mcp and documentation that is agent facing. I use serena as i can get lsp for yaml, markup and keep these docs like that

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Any luck with integrating platform.io? Have a esp32 project but VSCode can't provide type hinting with it's main c++ extension that is used by platform.io.

[–] Oisteink@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

No sry. I only use idf, and use their create vscode files for lsp to work

And tmux + skills for idf.py work including debug. Also repl on console/uart - agents love cli - including this.

Imo mcp > pure skills for tmux

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 0 points 1 day ago

Of course they do, it is hyperbole to think they are completely useless

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I wonder if it was even able to compile. I am a shitty hobby coder who just does it to make my embedded hardware projects function.

I have yet to get compilable code out of any of the AI bots I have tried. Gemini, mistral, and chatGPT. I am not making an account lol.

I have gotten some compilable python and VBA code for data analysis stuff at work, so I wonder if it is because embedded stuff uses specific SDKs that it can't handle.

Either way I have given up on it for anything besides bouncing ideas off of or debugging where electromagnetics issues could lie (though it has been completely wrong about that also even though it is using the wrong concepts, it just reminds me of concepts that I might have overlooked)