Comment by pluralmonad
18 hours ago
I'm sure I'm not the only one that thinks "Vibe CLI" sounds like an unserious tool. I use Claude Code a lot and little of it is what I would consider Vibe Coding.
18 hours ago
I'm sure I'm not the only one that thinks "Vibe CLI" sounds like an unserious tool. I use Claude Code a lot and little of it is what I would consider Vibe Coding.
They're looking for free publicity. "This French company launched a tool that lets you 'vibe' an application into being. Programmers outraged!"
Using LLM's to write code is inherently best for unserious work.
These are the cutting insights I come to HN for.
these are just old senior devs not wanting to accept new changes in the industry.
1 reply →
"Not reviewing generated code" is the problem. Not the LLM generated code.
Agree, but that's just the term for any LLM-assisted development now.
Even the Gemini 3 announcement page had some bit like "best model for vibe coding".
Maybe they are just trying to be funny.
Their chat was called "Le Chat" - it's just their style.
And while it may miss the HN crowd, one of the main selling-points of AI coding is the ease and playfulness.
If you’re letting Claude write code you’re vibe coding
So people have different definitions of the word, but originally Vibe Coding meant "don't even look at the code".
If you're actually making sure it's legit, it's not vibe coding anymore. It's just... Backseat Coding? ;)
There's a level below that I call Power Coding (like power armor) where you're using a very fast model interactively to make many very small edits. So you're still doing the conceptual work of programming, but outsourcing the plumbing (LLM handles details of syntax and stdlib).
Peer coding?
Maybe common usage is shifting, but Karpathy's "vibe coding" was definitely meant to be a never look at the code, just feel the AI vibes thing.
I know tech bros like to come up with fancy words to make trivial things sounds fancy but as long as it’s a slop out process, it’s vibe coding. If you’re fixing what a bot spits out, should be a different word … something painful that could’ve been avoided?
Also, we’re both “people in tech”, we know LLMs can’t conceptualise beyond finding the closest collection of tokens rhyming with your prompt/code. Doesn’t mean it’s good or even correct. So that’s why it’s vibe coding.
> If you're actually making sure it's legit, it's not vibe coding anymore.
sorry to disappoint you but that is also been considered vibecoding. It is just not pejorative.
1 reply →
The original definition was very different. The main thing with vibe coding is that you don't care about the code. You don't even look at the code. You prompt, test that you got what you wanted, and move on. You can absolutely use cc to vibe code. But you can also use it to ... code based on prompts. Or specs. Or docs. Or whatever else. The difference is if you want / care to look at the code or not.
No, that's not the definition of "vibe coding". Vibe coding is letting the model do whatever without reviewing it and not understanding the architecture. This was the original definition and still is.
It sure doesn't feel like it given how closely I have to babysit Claude Code lest I don't recognize the code after Claude Code is done with it when left to its own devices for a minute.
It gets pretty close for me, but I usually tell it how I want it done from the get go.