[lukan]

Haskell does not qualify for a large training set, though. (Nor for readability in my opinion)

I think I have never seen haskell software made wih LLM's but well, aside from university, I have not seen Haskell code at all. (Also Haskell purists I would associate with people who avoid LLM's)

I would rather go with Rust given these choices.

But I have good results with typescript (or javascript for simpler things). Really large set of examples. Tools optimized for it, agents debugging in the browser works allmost out of the box. And well, a elaborate typesystem.

[co_dh]

I used Claude that created a terminal based table viewer from rust first, to lean , and finally to Haskell. https://github.com/co-dh/tv-hask/tree/main

I give up rust because it’s not functional enough. There aren’t many things Claude can prove about a table viewer, and Haskell fits very well, and have enough libraries. Claude is pretty good at Haskell. I barely write Haskell before but I do know monad.

[klodolph]

I used Claude to generate Haskell and it works really well. Claude struggles sometimes with respecting abstraction boundaries, but Haskell enforces parts of those boundaries in its type system better than a lot of other languages (if a module can’t do IO, for example).

Works well, in my experience. Sometimes the agent does weird stuff that you have to rewrite, but I get the sense that this happens in any language.

Maybe Haskell’s training set is not large enough, but it seems to work despite the smaller training set.

[mightybyte]

How much code do you think is necessary for LLMs to be good enough?