Good point. 
It was actually (in part) to get to you and others dismissive of AI. It’s been very eye-opening for me the last few days to see what AI is capable of for coding (and more, e.g. Moltbook/OpenClaw). Yes, 130.000 lines of code in two weeks is not the best metric to good software, why I quoted more of the blog post on the (seemingly highly capable/intriguing) compiler. It’s not using LLVM, an example of recreating such a library…
If you’re NOT going to review the generated code, it doesn’t matter if the generated code is Julia or other language. It can be a made-for-AI language, like nanolang (as mentioned in the first video), or Elixir with the highest score (97.5), or Kotlin, Racket, C#, Ruby, Julia (78.0) in that order, 6th highest ranked. Or the AI could choose on its own depending on what’s best for the application, or any combination of languages…
The same goes for libraries. Theo is no longer using libraries as much (see another of his videos), because the AI just reimplements them. Other’s claim you can get $10.42 an hour coding, “syntax level programming”, since you’re competing with that cost for paying for the tokens, the AI needs to code 24/7. Doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be programming with the AI by making specs (agentic coding), the only way to still be valuable; by actually letting the AI do that too for you then interview you on needed changes…
Exactly, why I’ve now trimmed it (and added an EDIT at the top).
I dropped clearly marked offtopic from the end: Moltbook’s (and OpenClaw’s) main point aren’t coding, I just find it highly intriguing the AI has it’s own social network by now, and this AI assistant, posting there, and it’s a bit related to my main AI point so I showed the AI output… now gone, is in history.