3 ms·
> by writing N parsers (“readers”) and M renderers (“writers”), one could support N × M conversions. Beautiful writeup for a wonderful project. In an age of vi
by adamddev1 2mo ago
> by writing N parsers (“readers”) and M renderers (“writers”), one could support N × M conversions.
Beautiful writeup for a wonderful project. In an age of vibe-coding hype it's also so nice to see how things can be extended and snowball in usefulness when things are built correctly, by hand, from basic principles.
> Perhaps, then, in the future, people will no longer have a need for tools like pandoc.
I think we will need wonderful things like pandoc more and more. As mentioned there is a huge ecological and practical difference. Even if LLMs could get infintisamally close to deterministic-level reliability, it's still so many more orders of magnitude better in efficiency, especially with big batch jobs etc.
- vatsachak 2mo agoWell the difficult part is finding a good intermediate representation, which they did
- whalesalad 2mo agoYou can build things this simple and elegant with LLM’s you just need to instruct them to do so.
- tajd 2mo agoI think the art is about figuring out and defining what the underlying technical principles you want to leverage in order to provide a relevant software solution are. LLMs used naively might do that, but they probably won't. The work is still in figuring out what a useful domain representation of the problem is - and then you can unleash the llms for the boilerplate.