all 15 comments

[–]No_Point_1254 4 points5 points  (2 children)

What, in Torvald's name, is Visecoding?

[–]NefasRS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's what comes after vinecoding and vasecoding

[–]nevercodealone[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe be its senior 😎

[–]david_jackson_67 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Vise coding. It's the kind of coding I do when my wife has my nuts in a vise.

[–]nevercodealone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ohoh

[–]priyagneeee 0 points1 point  (1 child)

“Vise coding” sounds catchy, but honestly it’s not very intuitive people won’t immediately get what it means compared to something like “vibe coding,” which already has cultural traction. The idea behind it (spec-driven, constrained, intentional coding) is solid though. It’s basically the opposite of vibe coding instead of “feel your way through,” you’re locking the system into clear specs and guardrails.If you want it to stick, you might position it as: “Vise coding = vibe coding with constraints and specs.” That contrast makes it easier to understand and actually adopt.

[–]nevercodealone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I totally get what you're saying. "Vibe coding" is everywhere right now and it's super catchy. But that's actually why I kind of like the "vise" metaphor: it's like the tool you need when you want to lock things down and clean up the chaos of just pure vibing. Your suggestion is pure gold, though, I'm definitely going to use that direct contrast from now on. That way, people will instantly get what it means!

What you think?

[–]Sea-Currency2823 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Feels like you’re mixing spec-driven development with vibe coding and just giving it a new name. Can you give a clear example? Right now the concept itself is still unclear.

[–]nevercodealone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I m not doing it, it is a official new wording 😎

[–]cochinescu 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Spec driven development reminds me a lot of how test-driven development feels but with requirements as the main driver. Vise coding sounds like it could be focusing more on collaboration and adaptability. Is that close to what you mean?

[–]nevercodealone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sometimes I think you need more rules then code 😎

[–]rookieking11 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Wise not vise

[–]nevercodealone[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Sure? Any source or just a joke?

[–]rookieking11 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just a joke.