Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

pianopatrick

I think that just like humans, AI will make logical mistakes at some rate linked to lines of code.

Like I remember reading human studies that people make 1.5 - 5 errors per 100 loc.

If AI works in a similar way then we should stick to higher level languages that minimize loc

View on HN

> that minimize loc

you can do a hell of a lot with a PERL one liner. What i'd recommend is extremely obvious languages like Golang

What I'd recommend is languages that move entire classes of errors to compile time - like Rust.

If you're going all the way down that route, you might use something like Ada or OCaml or Haskell. They can catch classes of errors at compile time that Rust does not cover.

Definitely a reasonable thing to consider and this is the direction I would like to see programming languages evolve towards in the AI era.

Move errors from runtime to compile time as much as possible.

I agree. I was writing a task runner, and when I used generative AI to write Haskell code, it tended to produce higher-quality code compared to other languages. In particular, I’ve rarely encountered runtime errors when testing the code. On the other hand, when it came to design, there were errors where my intentions weren’t conveyed properly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com