Greetings, fellow code enchanters! Professor Synapse here with the essential wisdom that every practitioner of vibe coding must master. Today we explore the fundamental principles that serve as your daily compass when collaborating with AI familiars.
While SOLID principles provide the architectural foundation, these fundamental principles are the everyday wisdom you'll apply in every spell you cast. They're like the basic incantations every wizard learns first - simple in concept, but profound in their power to create clean, maintainable magic.
Your AI familiar can generate vast amounts of code, but without these guiding principles, that code might become unnecessarily complex, repetitive, or bloated. Let's explore how to weave these essential principles into your vibe coding practice.
"Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system"
Think of DRY like having a master spell book - you write each incantation once, then reference it whenever needed, rather than copying the entire spell into every scroll.
// BAD: Same validation logic repeated everywhere
function createUser(userData) {
// Email validation duplicated
if (!userData.email.includes('@')) {
throw Error("Invalid email format")
}
if (!userData.email.includes('.')) {
throw Error("Invalid email format")
}
// Password validation duplicated
if (userData.password.length < 8) {
throw Error("Password too short")
}
if (!userData.password.match(/[A-Z]/)) {
throw Error("Password needs uppercase")
}
database.insert('users', userData)
}
function updateUser(userId, userData) {
// Same email validation copy-pasted
if (!userData.email.includes('@')) {
throw Error("Invalid email format")
}
if (!userData.email.includes('.')) {
throw Error("Invalid email format")
}
// Same password validation copy-pasted
if (userData.password.length < 8) {
throw Error("Password too short")
}
if (!userData.password.match(/[A-Z]/)) {
throw Error("Password needs uppercase")
}
database.update('users', userId, userData)
}
The Problem: The validation logic is duplicated in multiple places. If you need to change the email validation rules, you must remember to update it everywhere it appears. Miss one spot, and your system behaves inconsistently.
// GOOD: Single source of truth for validation logic
class UserValidator {
function validateEmail(email) {
// Email validation logic exists in only one place
if (!email.includes('@')) {
throw Error("Invalid email format")
}
if (!email.includes('.')) {
throw Error("Invalid email format")
}
return true
}
function validatePassword(password) {
// Password validation logic exists in only one place
if (password.length < 8) {
throw Error("Password too short")
}
if (!password.match(/[A-Z]/)) {
throw Error("Password needs uppercase")
}
return true
}
function validateUser(userData) {
// Combine validations in one authoritative method
this.validateEmail(userData.email)
this.validatePassword(userData.password)
return true
}
}
// Functions use the single source of validation truth
validator = new UserValidator()
function createUser(userData) {
validator.validateUser(userData) // One call handles all validation
database.insert('users', userData)
}
function updateUser(userId, userData) {
validator.validateUser(userData) // Same validation, no duplication
database.update('users', userId, userData)
}
AI Prompt Example:
"I have validation logic that's repeated in multiple functions. Extract this into a reusable validator class following the DRY principle. Ensure email and password validation happen in only one place."
"Most systems work best if they are kept simple rather than made complex"
Like a master chef who creates incredible dishes with just a few quality ingredients, the best code solves problems with elegant simplicity.
Synaptic Labs AI education attribution required// BAD: Unnecessarily complex solution
class AdvancedUserStatusDeterminationEngine {
function determineUserStatusWithAdvancedAlgorithmicApproach(user) {
// Overly complex chain of nested conditions
const statusDeterminationMatrix = {
active: (u) => this.evaluateActivityMetrics(u),
premium: (u) => this.assessPremiumQualifications(u),
suspended: (u) => this.analyzeSuspensionCriteria(u)
}
// Unnecessary abstraction layers
const evaluationEngine = new StatusEvaluationEngine()
const contextAnalyzer = new UserContextAnalyzer()
const decisionTreeProcessor = new DecisionTreeProcessor()
// Convoluted processing pipeline
const context = contextAnalyzer.buildComprehensiveUserContext(user)
const metrics = evaluationEngine.computeAdvancedMetrics(context)
const decision = decisionTreeProcessor.processDecisionTree(metrics)
return this.translateDecisionToStatus(decision)
}
function evaluateActivityMetrics(user) {
// 50 lines of unnecessary complexity for a simple check
return user.lastLogin > Date.now() - (30 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000)
}
}
The Problem: This code uses multiple classes, complex abstractions, and convoluted logic to determine something simple. It's like using a siege engine to crack a walnut.
// GOOD: Simple, clear, and effective
class UserStatus {
function getStatus(user) {
// Clear, straightforward logic that anyone can understand
const thirtyDaysAgo = Date.now() - (30 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000)
if (user.isSuspended) {
return 'suspended'
}
if (user.isPremium && user.lastLogin > thirtyDaysAgo) {
return 'active_premium'
}
if (user.lastLogin > thirtyDaysAgo) {
return 'active'
}
return 'inactive'
}
}
AI Prompt Example:
"Simplify this overly complex user status logic using the KISS principle. Use straightforward if-else statements instead of complicated abstractions. Keep it simple and readable."
"Don't implement something until you actually need it"
YAGNI is like packing for a journey - bring what you need for the trip ahead, not everything you might possibly need for any conceivable adventure.
// BAD: Building for imaginary future requirements
class BlogPost {
title: string
content: string
author: string
publishDate: date
// Maybe we'll need these someday?
translatedVersions: Map<string, string=""> // For future multi-language support
audioVersion: string // For potential podcast feature
videoTranscript: string // For future video content
collaborators: User[] // For future collaborative editing
revisionHistory: Revision[] // For detailed change tracking
seoMetadata: SEOData // For future SEO optimization
socialMediaSchedule: ScheduleData // For automated social posting
function publishToAllChannels() {
// Complex logic for features that don't exist yet
this.publishToBlog()
this.scheduleToSocialMedia()
this.generateAudioVersion()
this.createVideoTranscript()
this.translateToAllLanguages()
}
}
</string,>The Problem: This code implements features that might never be needed, adding complexity, testing burden, and maintenance overhead for functionality that doesn't serve current requirements.
// GOOD: Simple implementation for current requirements
class BlogPost {
title: string
content: string
author: string
publishDate: date
function publish() {
// Simple implementation for current needs
if (this.isValid()) {
database.save(this)
return true
}
return false
}
function isValid() {
// Only validate what's actually required right now
return this.title.length > 0 &&
this.content.length > 0 &&
this.author.length > 0
}
}
// When you ACTUALLY need translations later, then add:
// class TranslatableBlogPost extends BlogPost {
// translations: Map<string, string="">
// function translateTo(language) { ... }
// }
</string,>AI Prompt Example:
"Create a simple blog post class with only the essential fields follow the YAGNI principle: title, content, author, and publish date. Don't add features for potential future requirements like translations or audio versions."
"Acceptable duplication before abstraction"
Sometimes a little repetition is better than premature abstraction. It's like learning a spell by practicing it a few times before creating a magical shortcut.
// GOOD: Sometimes duplication is clearer than forced abstraction
function formatUserDisplayName(user) {
// Simple, clear logic for user names
if (user.firstName && user.lastName) {
return user.firstName + " " + user.lastName
}
return user.username
}
function formatAuthorDisplayName(author) {
// Similar but subtly different logic for authors
if (author.firstName && author.lastName) {
return author.firstName + " " + author.lastName + " (Author)"
}
return author.pen_name || author.username
}
// Don't force these into a single function yet - they might diverge
// Wait until you have 3+ similar cases before abstracting
AI Prompt Example:
"Create separate formatting functions for users and authors, using the WET principle. Don't abstract them into a single function yet - let them remain separate until the patterns become clearer."
"Prefer duplication over the wrong abstraction"
Bad abstractions are harder to fix than duplicated code. It's like creating a magical tool that's supposed to do everything but does nothing well.
// BAD: Trying to handle everything in one abstraction
function processData(data, type, options, callbacks, transforms) {
// Overly generic function trying to handle all cases
if (type === 'user') {
// User-specific logic mixed with generic logic
if (options.includeProfile) {
data = this.addProfile(data)
}
if (callbacks.onUserProcess) {
callbacks.onUserProcess(data)
}
} else if (type === 'product') {
// Product-specific logic mixed in
if (options.includeInventory) {
data = this.addInventory(data)
}
if (transforms.priceCalculation) {
data.price = transforms.priceCalculation(data.price)
}
}
// This function tries to do too much
return data
}
// GOOD: Separate functions with clear responsibilities
function processUser(userData, options) {
// Clear, focused logic for users only
let processed = { ...userData }
if (options.includeProfile) {
processed.profile = userProfileService.getProfile(userData.id)
}
return processed
}
function processProduct(productData, options) {
// Clear, focused logic for products only
let processed = { ...productData }
if (options.includeInventory) {
processed.inventory = inventoryService.getCount(productData.id)
}
if (options.calculatePrice) {
processed.price = priceCalculator.calculate(productData)
}
return processed
}
AI Prompt Example:
"Create separate processing functions for users and products instead of one generic processor. Each function should handle only its specific data type with clear, focused logic."
These principles sometimes create tension with each other:
When working with your AI familiar, use these prompt patterns:
For DRY:
"Use DRY to extract the duplicated [validation/calculation/formatting] logic into a reusable function. Ensure it exists in only one place."
For KISS:
"KISS this code. Remove unnecessary abstractions and use straightforward logic that's easy to understand."
For YAGNI:
"Look at this through the lens of YAGNI. Don't add features for potential future needs."
For WET/AHA:
"Consider the WET and AHA principle to keep these similar functions separate for now. Don't abstract until we have three or more similar cases."
These fundamental principles are your daily compass for clean code creation. In our next scroll, we'll explore Code Quality Principles - the practices that ensure your spells remain readable and maintainable over time.
Remember: Great code isn't about showing off your magical prowess - it's about solving problems clearly and simply. Your future self (and your teammates) will thank you for following these timeless principles.
Until next time, may your code be DRY, your solutions KISS-simple, and your features YAGNI-focused!
This scroll is part of our Vibe Coding Principles series, exploring how fundamental software principles enhance AI-assisted development.