Very experienced software developers can be incredibly deluded about the quality of vibe coded output esp. for large scale feature work - see the SBCL discussion on fibers https://sourceforge.net/p/sbcl/mailman/sbcl-devel/thread/CACxje5-Nwfoe8REix2B8KGksLi31OSW0A32LQbfCccrpM1R1%3DA%40mail.gmail.com/#msg59302483 - worth reading closely. A proposal/implementation that took a couple days to vibe now has no specific timeline to address all the issues raised by reviewers.
Thread: [Sbcl-devel] SBCL Fibers proposal | Steel Bank Common Lisp

@[email protected] ps tbh SBCL looks like a joke for not telling that submitter to fuck off from their project
@brettm I maintain projects and I wouldn't interact w/ people that way even if I disagree strongly w/ something.
@[email protected] others may choose different words πŸ™‚

but the point I mean to make is the original submitter is clearly way out of their depth, and rather than choose some simple basic improvement that they are capable of making, chose a grandiose major subsystem like threading, and got an llm (which also does not know what it is doing) to cobble together something plausable-looking.

Whether you want llm submissions in a project or not, the _absence_ of that whole submission being shot down in no uncertain terms is the telling part.
@brettm by not shooting it down shows that the project maintainers take new contributions seriously. The submitter was not an inexperienced Lisp hacker. The SBCL folks seem to have their heads on straight far as I can tell wrt. civilized discourse.
@[email protected] be serious mate, don't treat me like an idiot from behind your facade of civility, if not inexperienced then why submit slop with such glaring flaws
@brettm I don’t know SBCL internals, but my reading of the discussion is that there are many non-obvious issues (not glaring) and the context to see them isn’t in the head of any particular contributor. This issue is what I was trying to get at.