Very much this. When you criticize LLM's marketing, people will say you're a ludite.

I'd bet that no one actually likes to write code, as in typing into an editor. We know how to do it, and it's easy enough to enter in a flow state while doing it. But everyone is trying to write less code by themselves with the proliferation of reusable code, libraries, framework, code generators, metaprogramming,...

I'd be glad if I could have a DAW or CAD like interface with very short feedback (the closest is live programming with Smalltalk). So that I don't have to keep visualizing the whole project (it's mentally taxing).

And you'd be wrong. I, for one, enjoy the process of handcrafting the individual mechanisms of the systems I create.

I like programming, I do not like coding.

To be honest I'm more annoyed by having to repeat three times parameters in class constructors (args, member declaration and assignment), and I have a macro for it.

The thing is, most of the time I know what I want to write before I start writing. At that point, writing the code is usually the fastest way to the result I want.

Using LLMs usually requires more writing and iterations; plus waiting for whatever it generates, reading it, understanding it and deciding if that's what I wanted; and then it suddenly goes crazy half way through a session and I have to start over...

between this and..

> But everyone is trying to write less code by themselves with the proliferation of reusable code, libraries, framework, code generators, metaprogramming

.. this, is a massive gap. Personally speaking, I hate writing boilerplate code, y'know, old school Java with design patterns getter/setter, redundant multi-layer catch blocks, stateful for loops etc. That gets on my nerves, because it increases my work for little benefits. Cue modern coding practices and I'm almost exclusively thinking how to design solution to the problem at hand, and almost all the code is business logic exclusive.

This is where a lot of LLMs just fail. Handholding them all the way to correct solution feels like writing boilerplate again, except worse because I don't know when I'll be done. It doesn't help that most code available for LLMs is JS/TS/Java where boilerplate galore, but somehow I doubt giving them exclusively good codebases will help.

Something is happening, its just not exciting as some people make it sound.

Of course, for that use case, you can _probably_ do a bit of text processing in your text processing tools of choice to do it without LLMs. (Or have LLMs write the text processing pipeline to do it.)

You're right, instead what we see is the emergence of "vibe coding", which I can best describe as a summoning ritual for technical debt and vulnerabilities.

i kinda think "javacript, the good parts" should be part of the prompt for generating TS and JS. I've seen too much of ai writing the sketchy bad parts