From Traditional Programming to Vibe Coding: Efficiency is Not Just a Myth

Let’s admit one thing: when I wrote the first version of code using traditional programming, I felt confident—type definitions were clear, interface designs were rigorous, and every line was typed by me. But therein lies the problem: rigor often means slowness.

In the past, to write a CRUD interface, I needed to first design the DTO, define the Entity, write the Repository, create the Service, and then attach the Controller. Even a minor change in business logic required adjustments across several layers, like an assembly line worker. With Vibe Coding, I simply throw the requirement to AI: “Give me a user registration interface using Spring Boot that returns JWT.” Thirty seconds later, the entire code, including exception handling, is ready.

Some might ask, “Would you dare to use the generated code directly?” This is the core difference in efficiency. In traditional programming, much of the time is not spent writing code but rather mentally running through the entire logical chain—this isn’t a bad thing, but it’s inefficient. Vibe Coding allows AI to set up the skeleton first, while I act as a “validator” rather than a “builder.”

In practical tests, for a moderately complex business module (about 2000 lines of code), traditional programming took 8 hours, including design, coding, and self-testing. Under the Vibe Coding approach, it took 1 hour to generate the initial version, 1 hour to review and adjust boundary conditions and naming, and another hour for integration testing. The total time was 3 hours, achieving an efficiency increase of over 160%.

Of course, it’s not a silver bullet. Complex domain models, performance-sensitive paths, and legacy system transformations still require manual control. However, in the vast majority of business development scenarios—interfaces, data transformations, exception processes, and test cases—Vibe Coding’s approach of “run first, optimize later” is much faster than the traditional “design first, implement later” method.

The best way to prove efficiency is not through theory but through comparison. You can conduct an AB test with next week’s requirements: half of the modules written traditionally and half using Vibe Coding. The results will speak for themselves: the code ultimately needs to run, and the process of how it’s written should have already shifted to a faster method.