氛围编码：基础设施问题
最近，氛围编码趋势引起了广泛关注，但我认为我们需要对其在生产应用中实际能带来的效果进行现实检验。
我对像 Lovable.dev 和 Bolt.new 这样的工具进行的简要探索显示，它们有效运行的基础是传统编码的基础设施，如 Supabase。这表明，氛围编码的最终成功依赖于其背后基础设施的质量和广度。
在原型设计和简单应用中，氛围编码展现出了一定的潜力。但对于复杂的生产系统，我依然持怀疑态度。我对其他人在使用这些工具进行超出基础实现的应用时的经验感到好奇。
在我看来，前进的道路需要为特定领域设计的专业基础设施工具。在我的工作中，我开发了 ChainReact.NET 库，提供了涵盖整个应用栈（前端、后端、业务逻辑等）的高级抽象，专门用于业务应用。这种方法可能为氛围编码在该领域真正有效提供所需的基础。一刀切的解决方案可能不会成功。相反，为不同应用类别量身定制的基础设施更具潜力。
你怎么看？我们如何能够弥合氛围编码的宏伟愿景与生产现实之间的差距？哪些基础设施领域最迫切需要开发，以使氛围编码变得可行？
查看原文
The vibe coding trend has gained significant attention lately, but I believe we need a reality check on what it can actually deliver for production applications.<p>My brief explorations of tools like Lovable.dev and Bolt.new revealed that they rely on traditionally-coded infrastructure like Supabase to function effectively. This suggests vibe coding's ultimate success depends on the quality and breadth of what lies beneath it.<p>For prototyping and simple applications, vibe coding shows promise. But for complex production systems? I remain skeptical. I'm curious about others' experiences using these tools for anything beyond basic implementations.<p>The path forward, as I see it, requires specialized infrastructure tools designed for specific domains. In my own work, I've developed the ChainReact.NET library with high-level abstractions that span the entire application stack (frontend, backend, business logic, etc.) for line-of-business applications. This approach could provide the foundation that vibe coding needs to become truly effective in that domain. One-size-fits-all solutions likely won't succeed. Instead, purpose-built infrastructure for different application categories offers more promise.<p>What do you think? How might we bridge the gap between vibe coding's lofty ambitions and production reality? Which infrastructure areas most urgently need development to make vibe coding viable?