And maybe if the LLM sometimes tries to use different naming, you could add an overload of the same API end point, as long as it doesn't clash with an existing one. So in the end for anyone using your library with an LLM it would appear to just work.
I noticed that letting GPT-4 write more of the code had the advantage that it understood it better and less context was necessary.
Now when I design systems for GPT-4 itself to use, I just let GPT-4 design them. Ask it to use an imaginary system, and what it comes up with (consistently) should be the API.
Those efficiencies will eventually be driven into all parts of the system. AI will be able to run the most efficient code on the most efficiently designed processors, that can be designed with the knowledge that only AI is going to use them. And then we can remove ALL the weird abstractions and accommodations we had to make for human brains.
I’m not saying it will happen tomorrow but language choice is just a temporary concern.
It’s based on human code, most of that isn’t efficient.
It could be even something that the larger and slower AI model is defining and implementing the APIs and smaller and faster is the one who will actually make use of those.
Or some variations of those combined, where it's a single AI model with a capability to select between the 2. If it's complicated APIs, it will try to crawl the docs for accuracy and make "AI intuitive" wrappers around all of the APIs and their edge cases, and making it easier for the fast model.
E.g. right now I think AI is excellent with JavaScript/TypeScript, but worse with some other languages like e.g. Rust or Scala.