[oytis]

But what is the purpose? When you rewrite a project in another language, it's for engineers to be able to maintain and further develop the project better on some metrics due to advantages of the language. It doesn't hold when LLM does the rewrite, since there is no one who understands the code after that.

It's a good demonstration of capabilities, sure, but the result itself makes no sense. We'll have to figure out where these capabilities can bring real advantage

[gamegod]

This is such an insightful comment. It also underscores why these AI companies' marketing efforts are promoting rewrites.

[stingraycharles]

I agree that the comment is insightful, but I don’t think AI companies are particularly promoting rewrites, other than that it’s a task LLMs are good at as “the code is the spec”.

The industry as a whole still is realizing that any LLM usage that actually writes all the code for you is causing cognitive debt, and we’re even slowly losing our skills of the art.

I’m trying my best to navigate this myself, but no matter what we do, using LLMs is both a blessing and a curse.

[Zakis1]

> When you rewrite a project in another language, it's for engineers to be able to maintain and further develop the project better

I don't think that is the case here. Bun is pretty much using AI to write all of it's code, with a human reviewing it. Zig exists as a language to provide a nice DX over C and Rust, not to be memory safe. If you are using an LLM to generate code, the DX benefits are removed and so then why would you ever choose Zig over Rust?

[cdelsolar]

why do you think no one understands the code after the LLM rewrites it?

[oytis]

Becase no one has written it. You can't ask the guy who has written it, not because this guy has left, but because he does not exist. Also, it often reads weirdly.

[cdelsolar]

You ask the LLM to explain the code...