<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Cpp on ROBOCO</title>
    <link>https://roboco.io/en/tags/cpp/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Cpp on ROBOCO</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2026 10:00:00 +0900</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://roboco.io/en/tags/cpp/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Modernizing Legacy Code with Vibe Coding (1/2): 20-Year-Old C/C&#43;&#43; Applications</title>
      <link>https://roboco.io/en/posts/legacy-cpp-vibe-coding-modernization/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2026 10:00:00 +0900</pubDate>
      <guid>https://roboco.io/en/posts/legacy-cpp-vibe-coding-modernization/</guid>
      <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Agents struggle with legacy C/C++ not because the code is complex, but because they have no way to check whether what they did is correct. The first investment in modernization is not a language migration but a verification environment.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&#xA;&lt;figure&gt;&lt;img src=&#34;https://roboco.io/posts/images/Dohyun.png&#34;&gt;&lt;figcaption&gt;&#xA;      &lt;h4&gt;Dohyun Jung - Principal Consultant, ROBOCO&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;    &lt;/figcaption&gt;&#xA;&lt;/figure&gt;&#xA;&#xA;&lt;hr&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;When I consult on vibe coding adoption, I often hear the same complaint: &amp;ldquo;Our project is too complex. The agent can&amp;rsquo;t do what we ask it to do.&amp;rdquo; At first, I assumed the cause was a specialized domain or poorly written prompts. But as the cases piled up, a common thread emerged. Most of the teams saying this were working on &lt;strong&gt;C/C++ codebases more than 20 years old&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
