quite elegant, feels like a great balance idiomatic scheme and OO

> With AI, we have converged on a set of languages. For the web, it's JavaScript or TypeScript. For backend, it's Go and Rust.

what a disaster we have ahead of us not because AI but because this kind of thinking

My case for why Elixir is especially suited for use with AI: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49835781 (summary: it's mostly about the BEAM, which is more of a k8s killer than a rust killer).

I don't think this really applies to any of the benefits I've described there:

> AI can replicate a lot of its features in Rust for one-tenth of the cost and 10 times the speed

The force of convergence should almost make us care more about other languages, since the explosion of software is a multiplier on good/bad designs, and we should consider what we want our AIs to be using.

Industry takeoff would certainly be a nice-to-have. But the racket community is largely computer scientists, who program for research. Will computer scientists turn to Rust to write papers because it's fast ? I don't think so, because their needs seems to be a language that's easy to pick up and experiment with, and writepapers with. People will argue over sexp syntax, but that's why Rhombus exists.

> Pretty much nothing else can get picked by AI if you start a new project.

You can pick literally almost anything, and current models will be able to write it. I don't know how you arrived at that statement.

Hygenic macros and the DSL they enable are fantastic ways to prototype things that then inspired stuff like LINQ.

There are enough AI stories on Hacker News. We don't need AI advocates coming to the stories that aren't about AI and saying they don't matter because they're not AI.

Things that aren't AI still matter and are still interesting.

Oh thats such a killjoy attitude. There is more to programming then "production", "shipping" and the overall corporate lala. You said it yourself, you get a lot of joy from designing your own programming language. And you know, even BEFORE AI it would have been unrealistic to see your langauge actually take off big time. So you answered your own question. Racket is likely not interesting to one of the big coprs. But you know, frankly, who cares? Some people use AI and have it write only 4 languages? Sure. Go ahead, and you know? Who cares? Let them have their monoculture. Such a sad sad sad comment.

Well, taking it to extreme why care about any other than machine code?

As AI programming tools improve, we will have the second coming from what 4 GLs, RUP, CASE tools, and Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Systems were trying to achieve, each on its own way as the next evolution on programming abstractions.

LLMs are able to write racket. I have a fairly large project I've been vibecoding for the last 6 months. Models predating deepseek flash 0731 used to make paren mistakes and had a hard time. But now Opus 5.5 for example does not make any mistake writing clear racket code.

I wouldn't say we've settled on a specific set of languages

To add to this, I definitely wouldn't say we've converged on a set of languages in general either! Most of my backends are written in Scala of all things, and LLMs have no issue with it. If anything, the expressive type system is helpful for them.

You forgot about Python.

Have you found LLMs to be good at metalinguistic abstraction? I have used them a little bit for lisp programming but never once have I seen them introduce macro.

If someone posts a story about topic Y and a reply is "does anyone really care about topic Y?" I would expect it to be flagged and downvoted.

The answer is "yes". Obviously people still care. No need to resurrect a dead bad post.