3 ms·
> Most of the claims that get thrown around about how a particular language is good for LLM use seem to be wrong (e.g., the claim that Ruby, Clojure, and J, are
by gchamonlive 2mo ago
> Most of the claims that get thrown around about how a particular language is good for LLM use seem to be wrong (e.g., the claim that Ruby, Clojure, and J, are particularly well suited to LLMs, which were mentioned in the evals linked above, as well as the somewhat common claim that Elixir is particularly suited to LLMs), but it's not clear what's right.
I feel this is a missed opportunity to explore the architecture of Elixir and why it's suited for agentic coding. With elixir, as long as the agent does all the work in a separate worktree and then applies the changes at once in the main repo, if you have a long living runtime the BeamVM is able to swap modules with their updated versions. AFAIK, In elixir every module is an autonomous actor that communicates with message passing and is isolated in their own VM. Agents can implement functional code batches and see the changes take effect in real time, no matter if it's a web server, a data transformation pipeline or something else.
- alberth 2mo agoI’m surprised the original source wasn’t linked to this blog. https://dashbit.co/blog/why-elixir-best-language-for-ai https://dashbit.co/blog/why-elixir-best-language-for-ai https://autocodebench.github.io/ https://autocodebench.github.io/
- nesarkvechnep 2mo agoYou are not 100% correct. Modules in Elixir are like namespaces, they contain functions. They're "static" and don't communicate with anything. Processes communicate with each other via messages.