No. This conveys a fundamental misunderstanding of how anything pertaining to programming works. This will never happen, ever. For example, take...
printf("Hello, world");
vs. a plausible illustration of how it might be compiled down to machine code... 48 65 6C 6C 6F 2C 20 77 6F 72 6C 64
48 83 EC 28
48 8D 0D F5 0F 00 00
E8 F0 00 00 00
33 C0
48 83 C4 28
C3
The latter now takes up 10x as many tokens (= 10x the cost/time, + context penalties), and is now architecture-specific, impossible to apply non-brittle program-wide optimizations to, etc. There is absolutely zero reason to ever have the LLM act as a compiler no matter how fast it is. Even if you believe LLMs will reach a state where they can actually generate good code at this level, you would be better off having them generate the compiler they would use.I mean you're right, but what about a different tokenizer and some guardrails... trained on compiled code... I just learned that gpt-5.6 will talk to you in base64 without tool calls so maybe it's possible.
For what it's worth, this theoretical LLM-based compiler would probably generate LLVM or some other intermediate representation rather than platform-specific machine code.