[jrm4]

Anyone else feeling like discussions like this feel archaic? due to Generative AI?

For all its problems, the presence of AI feels like it should solve some of these quibbles for the vast majority of people who program. I can't quite put my finger on why just yet, though.

[apsurd]

No, because pairing with AI is not the same as how we've come to define coding/programming.

It's something different. To say that it'll be _better_ relative to some stated measurement is fine.

Let's use a driving analogy. You can say cars get you from point A to point B so self-driving and teleportation are better evolutions. But you wouldn't say if someone wanted drive a car, enjoyed driving a car, wanted to get better at driving a car, they should get in a Waymo. Or teleport.

[jrm4]

Right, but lets keep that analogy going, it's a good one.

One can envision perhaps a future where, e.g. the majority of people (everywhere) don't drive cars because of public transport + Waymos.

In that world, issues surrounding "humans driving" take on a completely different flavor and relevance. Safety matters less, preferences of interfaces can matter more, etc. etc.

And I suppose it feels like the programming equivalent is around the corner, if not already here.

[tovej]

What do you mean? Programming languages all have different strengths and weaknesses that are completely orthogonal to LLMs.

Even if you vibe code an entire system, a human will eventually have to read and modify the vibe code. Most likely in order to refactor the whole thing, but even if by some miracle the overall quality is alright, somebody will have to review the code and fix bugs. The programming language and it's ecosystem will always be a factor in that case.

[jrm4]

Yeah, but those perceived strengths and weaknesses I'd say more often than not end up being non-issues i.e. popular chatter about whether a language is good or not and how it is used in real life pretty much never line up.

And my guess is that this "disparity" only widens with AI.

I'm not saying discussions like this aren't theoretically interesting or that people who are into it shouldn't have them. But my guess is they overwhelmingly won't matter large-scale.

[tovej]

That is a naive view to have. Languages have massive differences which directly impact how software is developed, built, distributed, and executed at runtime. Not to mention how it is used and maintained.

And I've yet to see an LLMs have any impact on making any of these differences disappear. The one thing I've seen LLMs do is generate more work for senior developers who have to fix vibe coded spaghetti. There language matters a lot.

[WhyOhWhyQ]

I don't understand what this comment means. It sounds like you think all programming has ended, which is not the case.

[jrm4]

No, but as I said elsewhere -- it feels like a possible, perhaps likely, case that "personal preferences in programming and style" become significantly less relevant.

[ricogallo]

I feel the same. I think the reason is that GenAI has effectively abstracted away the tooling layer. Not perfectly, and not always efficiently, but in terms of going from requirements → workable outcome, it has removed much of the pain of choosing one developer experience over another.

[jrochkind1]

these articles feel like they were WRITTEN by gen AI, I'll say that!