One primary critique revolves around the
lack of understanding of the code being produced. Veteran developers stress that relying heavily on generated code without really grasping what it's doing can cause severe knowledge gaps. As pointed out in discussions on platforms like
ChatGPTCoding,
"Vibe Coding often stops actual understanding of code." This sentiment echoes the need for developers to not just use AI tools to churn out code, but to learn, apply, and deeply understand the principles behind it.
Another essential point raised by experienced developers is that code generated via Vibe Coding can be unreliable and lack quality. Many who have dived into using LLMs for coding realize that while these systems can produce functional results, the quality may not always meet the required standards for production environments. AI-generated code may include edge cases or solve specific needs but lack the overall robustness that seasoned developers are trained to produce.
Even if generated code works in the short term, maintenance can become a NIGHTMARE for anyone tasked with it later. Developers who use an improvisational approach, as seen in various forums, caution against leaving code that is messy or overly complex without clear documentation. This supports the argument made by seasoned engineers that rigor, clarity, and maintainability should be at the forefront of coding practices for long-term projects. Vibe coding can neglect these factors, leading to a build-up of technical debt, as highlighted by veteran developers in their contrasting experiences.