2 pointsby hoangnnguyen4 hours ago2 comments
  • hoangnnguyen4 hours ago
    I wrote a longer piece exploring this, but I’m more interested in hearing how other engineers are approaching it in practice.

    https://codeaholicguy.com/2026/01/31/ai-coding-agents-explai...

  • pcmcc4 hours ago
    I have also encountered similar problems. Is it possible that the current AI coding is difficult to converge to the state we desire? Therefore, I think that currently, the AI tools are more suitable as a conversational tool when dealing with large projects. For example, humans can envision the framework and break down the implementation steps. Then, each small task can be given to the AI to solve, and then humans can integrate the code. This efficiency is lower than complete vibecoding, but it can alleviate the situation where the code becomes unmanageable.
    • hoangnnguyen3 hours ago
      I agree with this.

      Right now, models are good at solving small, local problems, but much weaker at keeping large systems aligned over time. So having humans own the overall design, break work into small tasks, and integrate the results is a very pragmatic approach.

      I see this less as a permanent limitation and more as a workflow gap. When AI is used purely as a conversational tool, humans end up doing all the convergence manually.

      Concepts like rules, skills, scoped agents, and verification feel like early attempts to move some of that convergence into the system itself, not to replace human judgment, but to reduce how much needs to be constantly reapplied.