lelele

But does such longevity equate to an strong, energetic life? Considering how protein intake relates to muscle and bone mass, wouldn't one rather live a little less, yet strong and kicking, rather than longer, yet thin and frail?

But if so, then where is the secret prompt sauce for getting those results, please? It's not like we complainers don't read and put in practice all we can about how to refine a spec prompt after prompt, yet our results are still disappointing. To me, that's no wonder at all, as we haven't reached AGI yet; hence, no matter how impressive and productive these tools are, I totally don't expect them to actually know what they are doing.

To be clear: LLMs write about 99% of my code, but with constant steering.

This.

> If you never use "naked pointers" and always use std::unique_ptr and std::shared_ptr, will it not reduce nearly all memory related bugs?

It will, as long as the code uses them correctly all the time, including when refactoring. In the end, that's still manual memory management.

Sure, but the original comment was more like “flawed solution that exists” vs “decent solution that exists”, wasn't it? That is: vibe-coding can't replace developers yet, not even mediocre ones.

I definitely hope so!

P.S. Again, it all boils down to AGI not being with us yet. I guesstimate that AI writes at least 95% of my code, but given how often LLMs come up with inefficient or ineffective solutions, I'd never entrust my reputation to a vibe-coded app. Startups may have little to lose vs much to gain from a shorter time to market, but an established company?

Mmm... People may overlook a glitch here and there, but judging by reviews on app stores, it seems to me that people get very annoyed when things break, especially when it happens at the worst possible time.

As for AI fixing things... Sure, at least for a while. But in my experience, AI can hit a wall and start going in circles. It doesn't happen often, but it can happen. And when it does, what recourse will you have for fixing the tangled mess that vibe coding tends to produce?

Sure, but how confident can they be that it doesn't also do things they don't want?

Tests can't be exhaustive, whereas even a mediocre developer is likely to possess enough background knowledge to notice risks that a non-developer would not think to test.

Some people keep forgetting that we haven't reached AGI yet. These tools can still make serious and sometimes obvious mistakes. Not long ago, vibe-coded software could embed credentials directly. That particular blunder seems to have been addressed, but there is still no reliable way to tell an LLM to avoid every class of obvious blunder.

Indeed. I'm trying to develop a similar style. The phrasing in the quoted passage is really tight.

Yes, C# is becoming more and more complex, but IMO C++ is still in a class of its own. Just compare how many different, sometimes competing ways there are to initialize variables in C++, each with its own subtleties.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. And of course, even if C++'s user base seems to be shrinking, it still works well for some categories of programmers.