3 ms·

Good use case for Elixir. Apparently it performs best across all programming languages with LLM completions and its concurrency model is ideal too. https://aut

Good use case for Elixir. Apparently it performs best across all programming languages with LLM completions and its concurrency model is ideal too. https://autocodebench.github.io/ https://autocodebench.github.io/

monooso 8mo ago
This is the exact opposite of my experience. Claude 4.6 has been excellent with Go, and truly incompetent with Elixir, to the point where I would have serious concerns about choosing Elixir for a new project.
- hbogert 8mo ago
  Shouldn't you have concerns picking Claude 4.6 for your next project if it produces subpar elixer code? Cheapy shot perhaps, but I have a feeling exotic languages will remain more exotic longer now that LLM aided development is becoming the norm.
  - majewsky 8mo ago
    We've finally figured out how to spread ossification from network protocols to programming languages! \o/
  - monooso 8mo ago
    The specific agent is irrelevant. This is related to a broader personal opinion regarding LLMs and language choice. Before we continue, the following opinion comes with several important caveats: 1. It only applies to paid professional work. If it's a hobby project, choose whatever makes you happy. 2. It ignores the strengths and weaknesses of different languages. These may outweigh any LLM-related concerns. 3. This is my opinion today. I _think_ it will survive longer than the next LLM cycle, but who knows these days. 4. May contain nuts. Okay, that's the ass-covering dispensed with, on to the opinion: If the choice is between a language which is "LLM friendly" (for want of a better phrase) and one which is not, it is irresponsible to choose the latter.
- dimitrios1 8mo ago
  We live in different realities. Opus and Sonnett practically writes the same idiomatic elixir (phoenix, mind you) code that I would have written myself, with few edits. It's scary good.
  - monooso 8mo ago
    I envy your reality.

monooso 8mo ago

This is the exact opposite of my experience. Claude 4.6 has been excellent with Go, and truly incompetent with Elixir, to the point where I would have serious concerns about choosing Elixir for a new project.

hbogert 8mo ago
Shouldn't you have concerns picking Claude 4.6 for your next project if it produces subpar elixer code? Cheapy shot perhaps, but I have a feeling exotic languages will remain more exotic longer now that LLM aided development is becoming the norm.
- majewsky 8mo ago
  We've finally figured out how to spread ossification from network protocols to programming languages! \o/
- monooso 8mo ago
  The specific agent is irrelevant. This is related to a broader personal opinion regarding LLMs and language choice. Before we continue, the following opinion comes with several important caveats: 1. It only applies to paid professional work. If it's a hobby project, choose whatever makes you happy. 2. It ignores the strengths and weaknesses of different languages. These may outweigh any LLM-related concerns. 3. This is my opinion today. I _think_ it will survive longer than the next LLM cycle, but who knows these days. 4. May contain nuts. Okay, that's the ass-covering dispensed with, on to the opinion: If the choice is between a language which is "LLM friendly" (for want of a better phrase) and one which is not, it is irresponsible to choose the latter.
dimitrios1 8mo ago
We live in different realities. Opus and Sonnett practically writes the same idiomatic elixir (phoenix, mind you) code that I would have written myself, with few edits. It's scary good.
- monooso 8mo ago
  I envy your reality.