alt Hacker NewsThe post focuses on Python, but I think it touches on an interesting question before skipping past it: ideally, what language would be best for our AIs to be programming in? The article says Rust. But can we do better? Rust has strong typing and memory guarantees which I think are important, but it’s also slower to compile. If we’re going to be doing agentic programming, where the agent is operating in a tight loop, iterating on the code, then it seems like we’d want something that can be faster to run after creating new code. Effectively, we’d want the agentic equivalent of a Lisp REPL, but optimized for the agent, or at least a language that compiles quickly, as it is run. This is one of the roles that Python plays today. Perhaps there is also a slow, sophisticated compiler that digests the same syntax and spits out the fastest , most secure code possible once the agent has iterated its way to the final answer.
Replies
A very interesting point. Coding with AI definitely requires tight, fast loops. I don't have much experience with Rust, but I had heard that the compiler is slow (because it's doing so much thinking and checking in advance).
I'm OK with Lisp output, but maybe that just shows how old I am. :-)
I wonder if it's possible (or wise) to have two different compilers for a language -- one that's optimized for such tight loops, and another that does thorough checking, etc. You know, kind of like -O, but at a much deeper level.
> what language would be best for our AIs to be programming in
I think "batteries included" is not a good thing to have in the future.
We'll want to be very explicit about what AI generated code can and can not do.
And so some form of effects based scripting language seems like a plausible choice: A language where by default "all batteries are removed".
It seems like the obvious point of tension is that you probably want AI to be constrained to/by some rigor. Rust is good because it enforces some safety measures, but I'm more interested yet in the work to have AI work with lean4 or the like to prove its code is up to spec. But that proof checking is probably in direct conflict with fast compilation.