At this point, changes to major programming languages have to adapt to a world in which AI systems generate and change much of the code. C++ contracts may be good or bad, but they are from before strong AI coding systems. So it's time to rethink.

And we have no idea what AI systems will be doing in 2027.

▲

leecommamichael 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> So it's time to rethink.

> And we have no idea what AI systems will be doing in 2027.

How would you begin to form a plan of how you'll rethink if you can't even see into next year? Isn't it beneficial not to change the languages too much because there's so much training data for the current revisions? AI does not need to be catered to, that is the whole point and why it is useful.

▲

Animats 12 minutes ago | parent [-]

We're going to need languages which both humans and AIs can read and write. We don't know what those look like yet. Contracts aren't a bad idea, but C++ has just become too big. Even people who used to be C++ language lawyers have said that.

	▲	leecommamichael 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Okay.

▲

ameliaquining an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not to defend the particular proposal at issue here, but my sense is that contract-like things synergize quite well with AI coding, for the same reasons automated tests and static types do.

▲

01100011 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

A lot of folks, many of them our most capable programmers, are fighting the last war. It’s like they think AI is going away and we’ll all work like it’s 2019 again.