[dysoco]

> I worry about new languages though. I guess maybe model training with synthetic data will become a requirement?

I read a (rather pessimistic) comment here yesterday claiming that the current generation of languages is most likely going to be the last, since the already existing corpus of code for training is going to trump any other possible feature the new language might introduce, and most of the code will be LLM generated anyways.

[malloryerik]

I've wondered to myself here and there if new languages wouldn't be specifically written for LLM agentic coding, and what that might look like.

[spopejoy]

I had the thought of an AI-specific bytecode a while ago, but since then it's seemed a little silly -- the only langs that work well with agentic coding are the major ones with big open-source corpuses and SO/reddit discussions to train on.

I also saw something about a bytecode for prompts, which again seems to miss the point -- natural language is the win here.

What is kind of mysterious about the whole thing is that LLMs aren't compilers yet they grok code really well. It's always been a mystery to me that tools weren't smarter and then with LLMs the tooling became smarter than the compiler, and yet ... if it actually was a compiler we could choose to instruct it with code and get deterministic results. Something about the chaos is the very value they provide.