The innovation isn't the output but the provenance. We don't necessarily need a Chris Lattner to make a compiler now. End of the day Chris Lattner is a single

The innovation isn't the output but the provenance. We don't necessarily need a Chris Lattner to make a compiler now. End of the day Chris Lattner is a single individual, not a magic being. A single individual posting submarine ads for his cleverness in the knowledge work subfield of language compilers. Of course he is going to drag the competition. Languages are abstraction over memory addresses to provide something friendlier for human consumption. It's a field that's decades old and repeats itself constantly being it revolves around the same old; development of a compression technique to deduplicate and transpile to machine code the languages more verbose syntax. Building a compiler is itself just programming. None of this is truly novel nor has it been since the 60s-70s. All that's changing is the user interface; the syntax. Intelligence gives rise to our language capacity. The languages themselves are merely visual art that fits the preferences of the language creator. They arbitrarily decided nesting the dolls their way makes the most sense. Currently have agents iterating on "prompt to binary". Reversing a headless Debian system into a model and optimizing to output tailored images. Opcodes, power use in system all tucked into a model to spit back out just the functions needed to achieve the electromagnetic geometry desired[1] [1] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/2987/1/012001 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/2987/1/...