IMO all of these higher level languages that were designed for humans have a very short lifespan at this point.
The only thing propping them up seems to be loyalty for the most part.
IMO all of these higher level languages that were designed for humans have a very short lifespan at this point.
The only thing propping them up seems to be loyalty for the most part.
Yeah we’ll see how that goes when the VC subsidies run dry and everybody gets corralled into token-based pricing.
I use rails because it makes thousands of good choices that I never have to make. If build apps the rails way I don't have to deal with a mountain of tech debt (in the form bad or ever changing choices).
So the future of programming is asking an LLM to spit out the appropriate assembly?
No, install my punch-card.md skill to get real performance.
What lower level lang would offer the benefits the beam/otp provide? I suspect you're generalizing a bit too much and haven't thought this through :)
I think most people that dismiss BEAM right off the bat either don’t understand the built-in beam process/supervisor/etc. model with its inherent fault tolerance, etc, or assume its not useful because it doesn’t address their use cases.
That or it’s a evangelist from the church of AI speaking based on faith rather than reason.
Or some combination of the two.
What will you use as training data for these new languages?
LLMs are good at current programming languages because they had lots of data to train on.
theres nothing in common between humans and llms or llm training sets!