← Back to context

Comment by simonw

8 days ago

My definition to "vibe coding" is the one where you prompt without ever looking at the code that's being produced.

The moment you start paying attention to the code it's not vibe coding any more.

Update: I added that definition to the article: https://simonwillison.net/guides/agentic-engineering-pattern...

10 comments

simonw

Reply
zx8080  8 days ago

What if you review 50%? Or 10%? Or only 1%, is it not vibe coding yet?

Where is the borderline?

  • simonw  8 days ago

    I think the borderline is when you take responsibility for the code, and stop blaming the LLM for any mistakes.

    That's the level of responsibility I want to see from people using LLMs in a professional context. I want them to take full ownership of the changes they are producing.

    • zx8080  8 days ago

      Sounds good, however the bar is probably too far and far too idealistic.

      The effects of vibecoding destroys trust inside teams and orgs, between engineers.

      1 reply →

    • maxbond  8 days ago

      I don't blame the agent for mistakes in my vibe coded personal software, it's always my fault. To me it's like this:

      80%+: You don't understand the codebase. Correctness is ensured through manual testing and asking the agent to find bugs. You're only concerned with outcomes, the code is sloppy.

      50%: You understand the structure of the codebase, you are skimming changes in your session, but correctness is still ensured mostly through manual testing and asking the agent to review. Code quality is questionable but you're keeping it from spinning out of control. Critically, you are hands on enough to ensure security, data integrity, the stuff that really counts at the end of the day.

      20%-: You've designed the structure of the codebase, you are writing most of the code, you are probably only copypasting code from a chatbot if you're generating code at all. The code is probably well made and maintainable.

      1 reply →