🕯 Enrico Frumento’s Post

#Python has some drawbacks for vibe coding. In my personal experience the thing manifests in three ways: the model invents nonexistent functions, arbitrarily rewrites portions of working scripts, or substitutes correct logic with unrequested alternatives. The cause is structural: each Python line has high semantic density. A single instruction can invoke complex functions through imported modules (e.g., pandas.DataFrame.merge() internally activates relational join algorithms, type handling, memory allocation). This means that a hallucination on a single line, for example, replacing merge() with concat() in the example above, radically alters the program’s behavior. —- What happens in Python contrasts with what happens in C/C++. In these languages, I observed the opposite behaviour. The generated #code is more stable and adherent to specifications. The probable reason is the peculiar nature of C/C++, in which every operation is explicitly decomposed into elementary instructions (manual allocation, explicit loops, pointer management). Semantic density per line is lower, so a hallucination on a single instruction has a local, limited impact. The model is forced to “reason” step by step rather than relying on opaque high-level functions. On the other hand, however, #security issues are worse on Vibe-Coded C++ #VibeCoding #AI #LLM #Coding #SoftwareEngineering #Python #CPlusPlus #CodeQuality #Hallucinations #DeveloperExperience #SecureCoding #AppSec #Automation #Programming Cefriel Sonia Montegiove Alessandro De Biasio Michele Bonardi Mauro Lomazzi

  • diagram

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories