• geekgrrl0@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    19 hours ago

    It’s like google-coding in 2010; nothing you search for is exactly what you need, but it could help you see why your code isn’t working.

    • iarigby@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I really don’t dig that comparison. When you look up a snippet on stackoverflow, for example, you can immediately see the quality of the answer, as well as feedback from real people

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        Yeah like if you start coming across snippets that aren’t even properly indented, you know you’re digging the real bottom of the barrel (been there while struggling to fix email templating I know nothing about back in the day). Now, the code you get from the LLM looks totally legit to the untrained eye, and it may even generate a convincing explanation.

        But you won’t have any indication when it’s dead wrong until you try to run it. And even then, it may be “working” in a way unintended because you don’t actually understand what you copy+pasted, because neither does the LLM ofc.

        I can’t even imagine the spaghetti bowl you can get yourself into if you just keep vibe coding yourself deeper and deeper, while understanding nothing.

        • MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          13 hours ago

          The spaghetti bowl is the real problem. You can make something that works, but it’s so fragile because the solution is rarely general and never elegant. The snippet might be surprisingly elegant, but it will reimplement the same code 3 different ways in 3 different places and the whole thing turns into a mess

      • geekgrrl0@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        18 hours ago

        You can see the quality if you’re an experienced coder. My comment lacks personal context in that I was in school in 2010 and there were plenty of my classmates who would plug snippets into their projects without fundamentally understanding what it did or learning what the project was supposed to teach us. Similar to a shortcut with AI in 2025.

        • forrcaho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          14 hours ago

          There are definitely people who cut & pasted from stack overflow in the work environment, too. The difference is that I, as the clean-up crew, could google their code and find the post it came from … and then I could read the comments and figure out wtf they thought they were trying to do. When they paste LLM-generated code in, there’s no trace of where the dumbfuckery came from.

          Just thinking about it makes me glad I’m near retirement.

        • iarigby@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          that was exactly my point, for the “non experts” googling and using AI is very much not the same, as googling provides them with a lot more actual information (quality, alternatives)