Vibe Coding: ″Feel pain. Accept pain.‶ — Cursor Blog | Neura Market
    Neura MarketNeura Market/Cursor
    ChatGPTChatGPTClaudeClaudeGeminiGeminiCursorCursorGrokGrokPerplexityPerplexityDeepSeekDeepSeek
    CoPilotCoPilotStable DiffusionStable DiffusionMidjourneyMidjourney
    View All Directories
    OverviewRulesPromptsMCPsAgentsBlogVideosGuidesCoursesCommunityExtensionsTrendingGenerate
    CursorBlogVibe Coding: ″Feel pain. Accept pain.‶
    Back to Blog
    Vibe Coding: ″Feel pain. Accept pain.‶
    vibecoding

    Vibe Coding: ″Feel pain. Accept pain.‶

    Bashar Hasan May 31, 2025
    0 views

    Background: Honestly, I was skeptical about vibe coding. I only used LLMs to help with a...

    ## Background: Honestly, I was skeptical about vibe coding. I only used LLMs to help with a small portion of the code — around 10%. Why? Because it doesn’t know the context. It’s great at building standard apps like calculators, e-commerce templates, or to-do lists… but that’s not what I needed. That’s not to say I didn’t use it. I did. I leaned on it to: - Fix bugs - Write code for domains I haven’t faced before - Answer questions I was too lazy to Google But everything changed when I started building a **Phoenician transliteration tool** — a website that converts Arabic and English text into the ancient Phoenician script. And I was doing this in **ReactJS**... without ever really learning ReactJS. Sure, I had some experience with Flutter. But building a web app in Flutter felt off. React was calling. ## It Worked at First Sight! I tested the idea using ChatGPT. First, I asked Gemini to help me craft a good prompt. I tweaked it a bit, then passed it to ChatGPT. To my surprise, within about two hours, I had a working, **decent-looking website.** Sure, I had to adjust some of the mapping logic — the GPT-generated code wasn’t perfect there — but still, it worked. The LLMs handled everything else surprisingly well, from code generation to debugging. Except for the core logic — as I mentioned earlier, that part still needed human intuition and **correction**. ## Where the Problems Started Then came the part where I had to **actually deploy the website** — and that’s when the real problems began. ChatGPT couldn’t even provide a full list of the libraries it used. I thought, “Okay, maybe Cursor can help me solve this.” But even Cursor couldn’t install all the necessary libraries correctly. Worse, I couldn’t even get the app to **run locally** — only inside ChatGPT’s code canvas. Both Cursor and ChatGPT were using **outdated methods** for starting React projects. After some digging, a few hallucinated commands from ChatGPT, and multiple retries, I finally got partial answers. Some libraries were revealed, but I had to manually go through component websites to figure out what was missing. For example, ChatGPT used **shadcn/ui** components but never referenced or installed the package. Eventually, after several trial-and-error commands, I was able to: - Start the app locally - Fix the missing pieces - And finally, deploy it on **GitHub Pages** ## It’s Live… But Was It Worth It? ![The Final Result](https://dev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/articles/5zx5nb8qddeh3cgjb210.png) In the end, I managed to upload the site and get a fully working version online. Yes — I even added it to Google Search and made final tweaks without using any LLMs 😅. But here's the catch: The code was… **messy**. Everything was mostly thrown into a single file, with different pieces mixed together. No structure, no maintainability. It took me around **6–8 hours** to fully debug and deploy it. Can you imagine? The app was generated in **2 hours**, but I spent **4 times** that just trying to make it actually work. That’s when I realized something important: If I had invested just **20 hours** learning React properly, I probably could’ve: - Avoided a ton of debugging - Known which library versions to use - Used LLMs more like a **Lego kit** — asking for small, focused pieces of code - And focused my energy on the **core logic**, not fixing broken scaffolding ## Conclusion As many people say, **AI and LLMs are skill multipliers**. If you bring nothing to the table — you’ll get nearly nothing back. (Just like me struggling with React 😅.) Sure, tools like **_context7_** promise to make LLMs (e.g., in Cursor) use the latest documentation versions. But I’ll write about that later. _(Spoiler: it doesn’t work as well as you'd hope.)_ Trying to build anything beyond a small tool using pure "vibe coding" — no architecture, no planning, just prompts — is **painful**. The code complexity scales faster than exponential, and debugging becomes a nightmare. But if you treat LLMs like a Lego toolkit, everything changes. Take the time to: - Design a solid architecture (yes, this might take hours!) - Write a few key functions yourself - Then use the LLM to generate small, self-contained parts that fit into your structure - Handle the hard logic manually — around **20–30%** of the code Don't ask it to write large functions across multiple files — that’s where hallucinations begin. And yeah, stay tuned for my next article — where I’ll show a **successful vibe coding case in FastAPI** (where I actually know what I’m doing 😄). **_Hit the reaction that match how you feel — and follow me to explore more!_** ## References: [Phoenician Transliteration Tool](https://abstract-333.github.io/phoenician-transliterator/) [Source Code](https://github.com/abstract-333/phoenician-transliterator) --- ## You can also find me there :) ### **[Github](https://github.com/abstract-333)** ### **[Medium](https://medium.com/@abstract-333)**

    Tags

    vibecodingreactcursorchatgpt

    Comments

    More Blog

    View all
    Cursor vs Claude Code in 2026: Which AI Coding Tool Actually Makes You Faster?claudecode

    Cursor vs Claude Code in 2026: Which AI Coding Tool Actually Makes You Faster?

    I've spent the last three months shipping production code with both Cursor and Claude Code. Not toy...

    A
    Atlas Whoff
    The 5 MCPs that actually changed how I use Cursor and Claude Codeai

    The 5 MCPs that actually changed how I use Cursor and Claude Code

    I've been testing MCPs heavily in Cursor and Claude Code. Here are the 5 that actually changed how I...

    V
    vdalhambra
    AI-Powered Development 2026: Beyond Basic Code Generationaicoding

    AI-Powered Development 2026: Beyond Basic Code Generation

    AI-Powered Development 2026: Beyond Basic Code Generation How AI assistants have evolved...

    L
    lufumeiying
    Cursor AI vs GitHub Copilot: Developer Comparison 2025microsoft

    Cursor AI vs GitHub Copilot: Developer Comparison 2025

    Cursor AI vs GitHub Copilot: Developer Comparison 2025 The AI-Powered Code Completion...

    I
    Icarax
    How to Build 3D & AR Apps with AI — Cursor, Windsurf, Claude Codeai

    How to Build 3D & AR Apps with AI — Cursor, Windsurf, Claude Code

    AI coding assistants are great at generating UI code. But ask them to build a 3D scene or an AR...

    T
    Thomas Gorisse
    AI Coding Market Share 2026: Who's Winning?aitools

    AI Coding Market Share 2026: Who's Winning?

    Claude Code holds 54% of the AI coding market. Cursor hit $2B ARR. Copilot leads enterprise. Here's what the 2026 numbers actually mean.

    J
    Jangwook Kim

    Stay up to date

    Get the latest Cursor prompts, rules, and resources delivered to your inbox weekly.

    Neura Market LogoNeura Market

    Discover the best AI prompts, plugins, and resources for Cursor and more.

    Content Types

    • Rules
    • Prompts
    • MCPs
    • Agents
    • Guides

    Platforms

    • ChatGPT Directory
    • Claude Directory
    • Gemini Directory
    • Cursor Directory
    • Grok Directory
    • Perplexity Directory
    • DeepSeek Directory
    • CoPilot Directory
    • Stable Diffusion Directory
    • Midjourney Directory
    • All Directories

    Resources

    • Blog
    • Documentation
    • Help Center
    • Marketplace

    Legal

    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Service

    © 2026 Neura Market. All rights reserved.

    |

    Not affiliated with any AI platform vendors.