41–50 of 210 posts
Randomly, my advice: don't sleep on this. Three or four weeks ago I was posting how LLMs were useful for one-off questions but I wouldn't trust them on my codebase. Then I spent my week's holiday messing around on them for some personal projects. I am now a fairly committed Roo user. There are lots of problems, but there is incredible value here. Try it and see if you're still a hold-out.
So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…
That's a very good question.
Rephrased: as good training data will diminish exponentially with the Internet being inundated by LLM regurgitations, will "AI savvy" coders prefer old, boring languages and tech because there's more low-radiation training data from the pre-LLM era?
The most popular language/framework combination in early 2020s is JavaScript/React. It'll be the new COBOL, but you won't need an expensive consultant to maintain in the 2100s because LLMs can do it for you.
Corollary: to escape the AI craze, let's keep inventing new languages. Lisps with pervasive macro usage and custom DSLs will be safe until actual AGIs that can macroexpand better than you.
So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…
Here is a Youtube video that makes the same argument. React is / will be the last Javascript framework, because it is the dominant one right now. Even of people publish new frameworks, LLM coding assistants will not be able to assist coding using the new frameworks, so the new frameworks will not find users or popularity.
And even for React, it will be difficult to add any more new features, because LLMs only assist to write code that uses the features the LLMs know about, which are the old, established ways to write React.
So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…
Right now languages are the interface between human and computer. When LLM's would take over, their ideal programming language is probably less verbose than what we are currently using. Maybe keywords could become 1 token long, etc. Just some quick thoughts here :D.
So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…
Not even close, and the article betrays the author's biases more than anything else. The fact that their Claude Code (with Sonnet) setup has issues with the `cargo test` cli for instance is hardly a categorical issue with AIs or cargo, let alone rust in general. Junie can't seem to use its built-in test runner tool on PHP tests either, that doesn't mean AI has a problem with PHP. I just wrote a `bin/test-php` script for it to use instead, and it figures out it has to use that (telling it so in the guidelines helps, but it still keeps trying to use its built-in tool first)
As for SO, my AI assistant doesn't close my questions as duplicates. I appreciate what SO is trying to do in terms of curation, but the approach to it has driven people away in droves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exact same experience. I have no clue what other people are doing. I was hunting for use cases where it could be used and it kept not working. I don't get it.
Is it only Rust that you've had this experience with or is it a general thing?
My thinking now is removed from the gory details and is a step or two up. How can I validate the changes are working? Can I understand this code? How should it be structured so I can better understand it? Is there more we can add to the AI conventions markdown in the repo to guide the Agent to make fewer mistaken assumptions?
Last night I had a file with 38 mypy errors. I turned it over to the agent and went and had a conversation with my wife for 15 minutes. I came back, it summarized the changes it made and why, I debated one of the changes with it but ultimately decided it was right.
Mypy passed. Good to go.
I'm currently trying to get my team to really understand the power here. There's a lot of skeptics and the AI still isn't perfect and people who are against the AI era will latch onto that as validation but it's exactly opposite the correct reaction. It's really validation because as a friend of mine says
"Today is the worst day you will have with this technology for the rest of your life."
So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…
I’m wondering whether we may see programming languages that are either unreadable to humans or at least designed towards use by LLMs.
So using agents forces (or at least nudges) you to use go and tailwind, because they are simple enough (and abundant in the training data) for the AI to use correctly. Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? Competing with the existing alternatives will be too hard. You won't even be able to ask real humans for help on platf…
> Does this mean that eventually in a world where we all use this stuff, no new language/framework/library will ever be able to emerge? If you truly believe in the potential of agentic AI, then the logical conclusion is that programming languages will become the assembly languages of the 21st century. This may or may not become the unfortunate reality.
Whether that's going to make sense, I have some doubts, but as you say: For an LLM optimist, it's the logical conclusion. Code wouldn't need to be optimised for humans to read or modify, but for models, and natural language is a bit of an unnecessary layer in that vision.
Personally I'm not an LLM optimist, so I think the popular stack will remain focused on humans. Perhaps tilting a bit more towards readability and less towards typing efficiency, but many existing programming languages, tools and frameworks already optimise for that.