alt Hacker NewsLanguages with stronger types like typescript (unfortunately) perform much better than dynamic languages like Ruby, Elixir or even plain JS in an AI editor world. Because the editors are type smart and you can quickly pop the type error into the AI chat and it will attempt to correct it. The feedback cycle is just insane. I really hate to say it, but Typescript has won.
Have you seen any studies that validate this? I feel this would be the case, but I can’t say I’ve actually seen it work out. Cursor writes better Elixir code for me than it does Kotlin, or at least it anecdotally seems so. I find it confusing.
I remember many years ago an akin experience, talking to John Brant and Don Roberts who had done the original refactoring browser in Smalltalk. Java was on its meteoric rise with tons of effort being dumped into Eclipse. They, and others with them, were eager to port these techniques to eclipse, and the theory was they’d be able to do even more because of they typing. But Brant/Roberts that surprisingly it has been more difficult. Part of the problem was the AST. Java, while typed, had a complex AST (many node types), compared to that of Smalltalk (late/runtime typed) which had a very simple/minimal AST. It was in interesting insight.