|
|
|
|
|
|
by Kerrick
457 days ago
|
|
|
The person who invented the term says: - "forget that the code even exists." - "'Accept All' always" - "don’t read the diffs anymore" I suppose we could get into a discussion about descriptivist vs prescriptivist language, but when a term is _this new_ and specifically coined by _one person_, I think using it correctly is more important than using it based on... well, vibes. |
|
|
1. That's how the person who coined the term defined it.
2. I think "vibe coding" is a more useful term if we give it that definition.
When I say "I vibe coded that", I'm communicating a very useful piece of information: I'm saying that the code might work and might not, and if you ask me to explain what it does I won't be able to without further work. I'm saying it's prototype quality code that needs more investment before it can be used in production.
If we let "vibe coding" mean any code that an LLM generates it loses value as a differentiating term. If you tell me "I wrote this with the help of an LLM" I'll shrug my shoulders - if the code is reviewed and tested and indistinguishable from code you would have written without that LLM then I care about as much as if you told me used Sublime Text as opposed to VS Code.
What matters to me is communicating "this is unreviewed LLM-generated code that may or may not be production ready but I can't tell you one way or another". THAT is what "vibe coding" means to me.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to lose this one. Vibe coding is already being used to mean "an LLM wrote it" and - even though it's only just over a month old - I think it may be too late to save it.
I can try though!