[monooso]

This is the exact opposite of my experience.

Claude 4.6 has been excellent with Go, and truly incompetent with Elixir, to the point where I would have serious concerns about choosing Elixir for a new project.

[hbogert]

Shouldn't you have concerns picking Claude 4.6 for your next project if it produces subpar elixer code? Cheapy shot perhaps, but I have a feeling exotic languages will remain more exotic longer now that LLM aided development is becoming the norm.

[majewsky]

We've finally figured out how to spread ossification from network protocols to programming languages! \o/

[monooso]

The specific agent is irrelevant. This is related to a broader personal opinion regarding LLMs and language choice.

Before we continue, the following opinion comes with several important caveats:

1. It only applies to paid professional work. If it's a hobby project, choose whatever makes you happy.

2. It ignores the strengths and weaknesses of different languages. These may outweigh any LLM-related concerns.

3. This is my opinion today. I _think_ it will survive longer than the next LLM cycle, but who knows these days.

4. May contain nuts.

Okay, that's the ass-covering dispensed with, on to the opinion:

If the choice is between a language which is "LLM friendly" (for want of a better phrase) and one which is not, it is irresponsible to choose the latter.

[dimitrios1]

We live in different realities.

Opus and Sonnett practically writes the same idiomatic elixir (phoenix, mind you) code that I would have written myself, with few edits.

It's scary good.

[monooso]

I envy your reality.