Some have expressed the opinion in this forum that the future of software lies in programs that are created and adapted at runtime, using genAI. I don't know how far we are from that.

▲

aleksiy123 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s already here the question is just to what extent?

Are google search results modifying your software at runtime?

Take or agent chat for example, the output text is a ui, agents can generate charts and even constrained ui elements.

Isn’t that created and adapted at run time?

If you mean like agents live modifying your code. I think that’s pretty much here as well. Can read the logs and send prs.

The only thing is how fast that loop will execute from days or hours to mins or seconds, and what validation gates it needs to pass.

My git repo is pretty much self modifying personal software at this point, that I interface through the ide chat window.

But I don’t think we will ever lose the intermediary deterministic language (code) between the llm and the execution engine.

It would be prohibitively expensive to run everything through models all the time.

But I am starting to think we need a more precise language than English when talking with LLMs. That can do both precision and ambiguity when you need either.

▲

jmaw 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Some kind of "code", you could say

▲

aleksiy123 an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes but more declarative vs imperative.

I say what the llm says how.

	▲	pishpash an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Not that long ago the workflow was to turn code comments into code. Maybe leave some comments as is now.

▲

pishpash an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Sounds like assemblers bemoaning loss of control to C. The solution was inline assembly...

▲

cassianoleal 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So we're back to vim over ssh in production, only without a human with _some semblance_ of judgement in the loop?

▲

mjr00 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Some have expressed the opinion in this forum that the future of software lies in programs that are created and adapted at runtime, using genAI.

Good luck with that. Users will flood you with complaints if a button moves 5px to the left after a design update. A program that is generated at runtime, with not just a variable UI but also UX and workflows, would get you death threats.

	▲	hilariously 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I think many software adjacent folks are super excited because they can now have the personalized toothbrush they keep asking people to make for them. The problem is that outside of that most people want boring and regular interfaces so they can get in and solve the problem and get out - they don't want to "love" it or care if its "sexy" they want it to work and get out of the way. LLMs transmogrifying your software at ever request assumes people are software architects and creators who love the computer interface, and that just doesn't describe the bulk of the population. Most people using computers use the to consume things or utilize access to things, not for their own sake, and they certainly don't think "what if I just had code to do x..." unless x is make them a lot of money.
	▲	munk-a 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		A program that is generated at runtime is fine (we have interpreted languages and often compile on demand) - the issue is with the non-deterministic nature of the output. I think the core issue is that non-deterministic output is great for a chatbot experience where you want unpredictable randomness so it feels less like talking to the mirror - but when it comes to coding I think we're pretty fundamentally misaligned in sticking to that non-deterministic approach so firmly.