[GeorgeTirebiter]

Absolutely serious question: is anybody actually writing code anymore? (Reviewing it, architecting it, sure -- we do that). But writing code? If NOT, then seems to me, what we want in our LLM output is CODE THAT IS TRIVIAL TO UNDERSTAND (I apologize for shouting from the rooftops.)

I'm not sure adding 'features' to Python anymore makes sense - UNLESS those features help humans understand LLM code. Part of the problem is, of course, that LLMs haven't been trained on the latest-and-greatest, so they won't output any of it (even new training events won't capture the latest very much, since there is so little of it relative to what is already out there).

But again -- do new features help HUMANS understand what the LLMs produce? If not, seems to me ... new features merely add complexity for no apparent gain. (Or am I confused about this?) THANKS for any helpful opinions.

[GeorgeTirebiter]

Wow, the Python folks do not want to entertain different goals for the language, it would seem. I still remain interested in whether it makes sense to add features to Python anymore, given that LLMs write all the code. Unless, as I said, such features enhance human comprehension (since we have to review the code the LLM produces).

[t43562]

If you don't write code you won't understand what you're reviewing. Any manager discovers this - their ability to review atrophies.