There’s no need to be an ass about it. I didn’t say this is definitely slop, but it is unsurprising that people think it is. I don’t think it’s without merit to wonder if someone committing 12 million lines of code within a few weeks is using AI.
Q: But a random stranger on an internet forum told me it is!
Oh well, then it has to be true, right?
Q: I still don’t trust you!
If you have used any vibecoded software before you’ll know that Fluxer is too good to be that. Trust your own feeling when using the app and when reading the code if that’s your sort of thing, not karma-seekers on Reddit, is my piece of advice.
I think “vibecided” is intentionally used. I remember the post I referenced talking about him using it for tasks, but then checking the code. I don’t think that’s technically vibe coding, but intentionally not disclosing any AI use is concerning to me.
A meaningful distinction to me at least is that when I’m vibecoding a one-off personal project I don’t care about, I don’t even look at the code.
When I’m using LLMs on a serious project that matters, I never blanketly give it a task to write code. Debugging and investigation work is more “go do the thing” vibecody, but when it comes to actually implementing fixes or features: I’d only ever use an LLM when I already know what the code should look like. And most of the time, when I’m writing in a language that I’m not perfectly familiar with, it’s writing as good as me if not better. Its a flat win case. In something like C++, I have a particular style and am very pedantic, and I know the standard very well, and so I tend to need to handhold and fix or rewrite a lot more. The vast majority of programmers who write C++ don’t write like I do, and I’m willing to bet that my “like me or better” statement about languages I’m only intermediate in applies to most casual or junior C++ devs.
With that said, his diff seems to have a hell of a lot of additions. I’d be willing to bet if he’s using Frontier LLMs that the vast majority of that is testing (and comments if they use claude…)
I think if someone has a hard no-AI stance, then it’s probably just safe to avoid the project. Whether or not it’s “vibecoding” depends a lot on their workflow and their standards.
If I need to write 10,000 lines, and I know what it should look like, and the AI produces that: I see no reason why I should waste my time typing it all out by hand. With that said, “Bot, go implement XYZ” isn’t how I or most experienced devs work with AI, and that’s where a lot of problems come from.
The good news is that it’s mostly a self-solving problem, because those codebases become completely impossible to work in over time.
AI was used in the development of this app because of course it was.
Where did you see that?
12m lines of code committed in the last 3 months (the bulk of that within the last month) by one committer doesn’t exactly scream human input.
You’re right. Code generators, formatters, static analyzers, vendoring exist btw.
Not human input != LLM
Are there any actual software engineers in this thread. 😅
There’s no need to be an ass about it. I didn’t say this is definitely slop, but it is unsurprising that people think it is. I don’t think it’s without merit to wonder if someone committing 12 million lines of code within a few weeks is using AI.
It was in a blog post on the site that’s conveniently missing now.
I will ask him about it. He is active in the “Fluxer HQ”.
Here is what it says in the FAQ:
I think “vibecided” is intentionally used. I remember the post I referenced talking about him using it for tasks, but then checking the code. I don’t think that’s technically vibe coding, but intentionally not disclosing any AI use is concerning to me.
Yes, overly specific denial is sus.
No human being can check 15 million LoC in three months.
A meaningful distinction to me at least is that when I’m vibecoding a one-off personal project I don’t care about, I don’t even look at the code.
When I’m using LLMs on a serious project that matters, I never blanketly give it a task to write code. Debugging and investigation work is more “go do the thing” vibecody, but when it comes to actually implementing fixes or features: I’d only ever use an LLM when I already know what the code should look like. And most of the time, when I’m writing in a language that I’m not perfectly familiar with, it’s writing as good as me if not better. Its a flat win case. In something like C++, I have a particular style and am very pedantic, and I know the standard very well, and so I tend to need to handhold and fix or rewrite a lot more. The vast majority of programmers who write C++ don’t write like I do, and I’m willing to bet that my “like me or better” statement about languages I’m only intermediate in applies to most casual or junior C++ devs.
With that said, his diff seems to have a hell of a lot of additions. I’d be willing to bet if he’s using Frontier LLMs that the vast majority of that is testing (and comments if they use claude…)
I think if someone has a hard no-AI stance, then it’s probably just safe to avoid the project. Whether or not it’s “vibecoding” depends a lot on their workflow and their standards.
If I need to write 10,000 lines, and I know what it should look like, and the AI produces that: I see no reason why I should waste my time typing it all out by hand. With that said, “Bot, go implement XYZ” isn’t how I or most experienced devs work with AI, and that’s where a lot of problems come from.
The good news is that it’s mostly a self-solving problem, because those codebases become completely impossible to work in over time.
Fluxer is PURE slop. 1.5 million lines commuted in one month by one person is obviously not human made.