of course it is vibed.
it doesn't matter as long as it works.
it doesn't matter as long as it works.
Is it?
People have solved AI bugs with AI. If some vibe project eventually hits some bug and stops working, what exactly stops using AI to fix it? Is the idea that bugs will go beyond the limits of AI capability?
If you meant to say that when an AI vibe coded project beyond some complexity it's difficult for a human coder to manually go through all the code they didn't write, understand it, and find the issue, sure.
And it's quite easy to ask an AI to refactor a certain way too.
The loops themselves are a lot better, but it still needs judgement calls, and Fable will often take an odd direction, and if you don't catch it, that odd choice will compound as it continues to layer on top.
Even so, if it does 80% of the work itself, that's still a 5x improvement.
Plus it keeps the human coder in control and in the loop (and in a job).
If you use AI yourself, with a focus on bug fixing and stability, you'll find that AI can fix bugs just fine.
And they are TRYING to fix the bugs, they just keep failing over and over, so your reply is entirely incorrect.
Nice try though.
If you ship updates fast, you can't just 'focus on both'. You focus on one or another, doesn't matter if you use "unlimited tokens", same way 9 pregnant women can't make a baby in a month.
>And they are TRYING to fix the bugs, they just keep failing over and over, so your reply is entirely incorrect.
That they "keep failing over and over" is a huge overstatement, it just has some bugs like other software has, so your point can be simply dismissed.
Can you explain why not? Just spin up another agent. 9 pregnant women can do 9 babies in 9 months.
This is a real question. I assure you that teams of more than 1 developer do exist, so I don't see why agents could not work on the same code.
> That they "keep failing over and over" is a huge overstatement
You call it an overstatement because of your religious beliefs. Unfortunately religious beliefs don't really change the fact that they keep failing in fixing their things.
Besides, AI can also be told to do the refactor.
I think the clankers would call this a "load bearing statement".
I see this as a case of the "quick to get to a POC that falls apart after sustained development for the same reasons it didn't work pre-Fable" problem.
Same thing people claim every time a new model is released, yet never seems to be true.
Do they still make mistakes? Sure. So do humans, though, so it would be unrealistic to expect perfection. The question is: does Fable make fewer mistakes than the median human coder? And at this point I'm genuinely not sure anymore.
> It does not create messes.
?