Remix.run Logo
▲ VikramBhamre 3 hours ago

I mean its cool but what about all of the extra infra I need to write because support for the lang is not as extensive and so more code I need to maintain?

▲misterchocolat 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean if we're heading towards a future where code gen gets super cheap and super good what stops you from porting the libraries you want?

▲ehe78qhe 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Mostly, having to rediscover all of the underdocumented quirks and features in whatever I'm trying to interface with.

Partly, having to do my own pentesting and red team work instead of using someone else's work that has already been pentested.

▲frollogaston 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yeah, I'll use LLMs to write all application code, but not so sure about libraries. Especially more foundational ones.

▲Jach an hour ago | parent [-]

What to you are the foundational ones? Perhaps CL has them already, or if it's actually a C lib that every other lang uses, CL can use that too. If not, the feedback would at least give people ideas.

From the parent's security standpoint I'm more sympathetic, there's been a lot fewer eyes on CL code, there's no central place to keep track of discovered security issues, and perhaps more vigilance is required against untrusted input compared to other languages. At the same time, every time I've exposed a CL-powered website I've noticed various attempts at e.g. wordpress endpoint discovery and I sleep soundly knowing a wordpress deployment is something I'll never have to worry about or take extra precautions against. Every time I hear about a supply chain attack I also am happy about the choice of CL. (Though in truth it's not to say that such attacks aren't possible, but for various reasons, one of them rather quite embarrassing to the overall ecosystem, pulling a big one off is going to be more difficult.)