[barnabee]

Yeah I agree. I’m “vibe engineering” an entire (non-trivial) programming language, toolchain, and standard library, as well as some smaller side projects. I leave OpenCode implementing entire milestones unattended for long periods regularly.

I feel like I’d need to not have a job or a life if I wanted to exhaust the OpenAI $100 plan using GPT 5.5 xhigh, and I’ve found it insanely capable.

That said, while I don’t read the code much (if at all), I do discuss each milestone up front to make a plan, and use/dogfood the results to direct any follow-ups and refinements, which puts a natural cap on the ratio of LLM contributions to my input for these side projects. I believe these human parts are still necessary not to eventually end up with a mess.

[Brian_K_White]

Who is the consumer of the new language?

[barnabee]

Me, to scratch an itch and because LLMs make it possible.

I'll probably throw it out on the internet someday if it gets far enough, but there are no attention/adoption related goals attached to the project.

It's currently useful for trivial scripting and iterating as and when I have time.

[Brian_K_White]

That seems like a logical contradiction. What use is a programming language for a human to program a computer after you have already decided it's reasonable to have ais do the programming?

[barnabee]

What use is knitting as a hobby after you have already decided it’s reasonable to buy clothes from a shop?

…and countless other examples

Not to mention the fact that AIs do the programming in a programming language and it’s quite possible to have ideas about what would be a better language for that.

And that I’m not certain how much of the programming it’s actually reasonable to fully delegate to AIs, and this is both an experiment in seeing how far I can push it (further than expected!) and in building a language I’d rather use than anything that exists today for the stuff the AIs shouldn’t be doing (also going better than expected!)