141–150 of 194 posts
Next you can let Claude play your video games for you as well. Gads we are a voyeuristic society aren’t we.
Honestly some of the most fun I had playing Ultima Online was writing scripts to play it for me.
Same but Codex, still chipping away at it. https://github.com/doublemover/Slopjective-C It has not had any issues at all writing objc3 code
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Verbosity is an objective metric. Code readability is another, correlating one, but this is more subjective. To me go scores pretty low here - code flow would be readable were it not for the huge amount of noise you get from error "handling" (it is mostly just syntactic ceremony, often failing to properly handle the error case, and people are desensitized to these blocks so code review are more likely to miss these).…
Every time I hear complaints about error handling, I wonder if people have next to no try catch blocks or if they just do magic to hide that detail away in other languages? Because I still have to do error handling in other languages roughly the same? Am I missing something?
Wait. You built a new language, that there's thus no training data for. Who the hell is going to use it then? You certainly won't, because you're dependent on AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Verbosity is an objective metric. Code readability is another, correlating one, but this is more subjective. To me go scores pretty low here - code flow would be readable were it not for the huge amount of noise you get from error "handling" (it is mostly just syntactic ceremony, often failing to properly handle the error case, and people are desensitized to these blocks so code review are more likely to miss these).…
Every time I hear complaints about error handling, I wonder if people have next to no try catch blocks or if they just do magic to hide that detail away in other languages? Because I still have to do error handling in other languages roughly the same? Am I missing something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a citation for that?
Yes[1]. Copyright applies to human creations, not machine generated output. It's possible to use AI output in human created content, and it can be copyrightable, and substantiative, transformative human-creative alteration of AI output is also copyrightable. 100% machine generated code is not copyrightable. [1] https://newsroom.loc.gov/news/copyright-office-releases-part...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In addition, I think token efficiency will continue to be a problem. So you could imagine very terse programming languages that are roughly readable for a human, but optimized to be read by LLMs.
That's an interesting idea. But IMO the real 'token saver' isn't in the language keywords but it's in the naming of things like variables, classes, etc. There are languages that are already pretty sparse with keywords. e.g in Go you can write 'func main() string', no need to define that it's public, or static etc. So combining a less verbose language with 'codegolfing' the variables might be enough.
In all seriousness, this is great, and why not? As the post said, what once took months now takes weeks. You can experiment and see what works. For me, I started off building a web/API framework with certain correctness built in, and kept hitting the same wall: the guarantees I wanted (structured error handling, API contracts, making invalid states unrepresentable) really belonged at the language level, not bolted onto a framework. A few Claude Code sessions later, I had a spec, then a tree-sitter implementation, then a VM/JIT... something that, given my sandwich-generation-ness, I never would have done a few months ago.