I've wondered what vibe codings impact is to language development, whereas C vs LISP had their tradeoffs when deciding what to use. If everything is vibecoded (not saying it will be) everything probably normalizes to javascript

▲

jrochkind1 17 hours ago | parent [-]

That's what this discussion made me think of. To take it further -- if you were going to design a language expressly for AI-generated code, what might some of it's features be?

I think strong static typing probably? Which is, well, not javascript in fact! (And I have bucked the trend on this previously, liking ruby -- but I'm not sure I'd want AI-generated code without it?)

▲

sramsay 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Author, here. This is exactly the question I was trying (perhaps ineptly) to pose: If we designed a programming language with the idea that it would be primarily or exclusively vibe coded, what would that language look like? Might it look something more like Lean? Or more like theorem provers in general? Or would it look more like a natural language PL (think Inform 7)? Or what about a heavily declarative DSL like FAUST (for audio DSP)?

None of our existing programming languages were designed for quite the circumstance in which contemporary programming now finds itself; they all address an ergonomic situation in which there are humans and machines (not humans, machines, and LLMs).

It's possible, I suppose that the only PL that makes sense here is the one the LLMs "knows" best, but I sort of doubt that that makes sense over the long term. And I'm repeating myself, but really, it seems to me that a language that was written entirely for the ergonomic situation of human coders without any consideration of LLMs is not addressing the contemporary situation. This is not a precise analogy, but it seems to me a little like the difference between a language that was designed before vs after multicore -- or before vs after the internet.

▲

benjiro 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The problem with creating a programming language for LLMs, goes back to, what are LLMs? They are trained on masses of human written code, that is written in human readable form.

So even if you make a better programming language for a LLM, it has nothing to train on. Unless we start to transcode human language code to the LLM code.

Are the vectors/tokens/whatever, not already LLM code at this point? Technically, LLMs not are doing what Haxe was doing (haxe.org) but in a more advanced form?

Even if we make a more LLM like programming code, in a sense, we are just making another code that needs to be translated into the tokens that consist in a LLM model, no?

Feels like we are starting to hit philosophical debates with that one lol

▲

rmsaksida 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Unrelated - it looks like your blog's RSS feed isn't up to date. :-)

	▲	sramsay 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thank you!

▲

tatjam 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Lean 4 seems to be pretty AI-usable, and you get insane guarantees (but LLM do seem to make very heavy use of "sorry")