←back to thread

638 points wut42 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.243s | source
Show context
arrowsmith ◴[] No.44328363[source]
Ah man I'm really happy to see this and excited to try it out.

As an Elixir enthusiast I've been worried that Elixir would fall behind because the LLMs don't write it as well as they write bigger languages like Python/JS. So I'm really glad to see such active effort to rectify this problem.

We're in safe hands.

replies(12): >>44328630 #>>44328683 #>>44328727 #>>44328801 #>>44328898 #>>44329433 #>>44329534 #>>44329569 #>>44329604 #>>44329853 #>>44330513 #>>44331985 #
throwawaymaths ◴[] No.44328630[source]
in principle llms should do better on immutable languages since there is no risk a term will get modified by a distant function call.
replies(1): >>44328687 #
bevr1337 ◴[] No.44328687[source]
In my experience, it's the functional part, not immutability, where they fall short. Any LLM can write immutable C# because it's easy and there's incredible amounts of training data.
replies(1): >>44328850 #
1. throwawaymaths ◴[] No.44328850[source]
good news, "immutable" is pretty much the only way that elixir is "functional" except for lambdas being first class datatypes (which is almost every language now)