Sue SmithFeb 1

"The specification language gets more precise over time, because natural language is ambiguous and different models interpret the same prompt differently. You add more structure. You define exact function signatures. You specify return types. You nail down error handling behavior with enough precision that two different models should produce interchangeable output. The specification starts looking less like English prose and more like a programming language."

https://nesbitt.io/2026/01/30/will-ai-make-package-managers-redundant.html

Will AI Make Package Managers Redundant?

Following the prompt registry idea to its logical conclusion.

Andrew Nesbitt
Show threadSue SmithFeb 1
This is obviously a thought experiment but I can genuinely see a lot of these spec driven projects going this way, at some point you're trying to do something that would have been easier just using an existing high level programming language.
Show threadSue SmithFeb 1
Which might be an indictment of how badly we've taught these programming languages tbh lol.
Show threadSue SmithFeb 1
Honestly I think there is a lot to this, when I see some of the guides to using LLMs for folk without coding skills I think I could more easily just teach them to code. The mystification of coding is also a huge part of the appeal of this stuff for lots of people.
Show threadGreg Wilson
@sue +100 to this, except I think that learning to code has become more daunting than ever thanks to package managers, CI/CD, linting tools, etc. - I've been doing this a while, and I find lists like https://willigottstein.medium.com/from-good-code-to-reliable-software-a-practical-guide-to-production-ready-python-packages-aa881c2c31e9 intimidating. (Type hints in Python? Whatever happened to the friendly, approachable little language I once knew?)
From Good Code to Reliable Software: A Practical Guide to Production-Ready Python Packages

Most of us have written Python that worked beautifully — right up until someone else tried to install it, run it on a different machine or…

Medium
Feb 1 at 12:37pmWeb
Show threadSue SmithFeb 1
@gvwilson It definitely has, you can't even make a simple website without a "build" process etc, we've overcomplicated the fuck out of everything and now those patterns are baked into LLM output.
Show threadDavid BeazleyFeb 1
@gvwilson @sue That "friendly, approachable little language" is long gone. Nobody's going to get a promotion for solving a problem with a simple function and a dict.
Show threadDave bauerFeb 1
@gvwilson @sue I can download Thonny IDE and start interactively learning Python right away. The tasks in that post have always been required to produce production ready code for distribution, but none of them are required to learn to code.
Show threaddwfFeb 1

@gvwilson @sue It's still there. Nobody's forcing you to type-hint your throwaway Python scripts.

That said, I now add them in my throwaway scripts, even when I'll never use them for static analysis, because they are a higher bitrate communication channel to my future self than docstrings for the specific information they convey.

Show threadFranchescaFeb 1
@dwf @gvwilson @sue it feels wrong to not use type hints. Definitely better readability and more useful error messages.
Show threadGreg WilsonFeb 1
@Frantasaur @dwf @sue better readability _for who_, and do you have evidence to back that up? the studies I've seen about the impact of strong typing on code comprehension weren't particularly compelling - if something stronger has been published since 2019, I'd be grateful for a pointer.
Show threadFranchescaFeb 1
@gvwilson @dwf @sue better readability for me, of course. A method signature is a contract. If someone writes a function without type hints, it’s considerably less information on how the author expected others to use that function. Perhaps that author was just my past self, and I don’t remember exactly what I was thinking back then. This has personally saved me a lot of time, so I consider it basic common sense.
Show threaddwfFeb 1

@gvwilson @Frantasaur If you assume

1. That parameters to a function ought to be documented,
2. That the natural language documentation of that parameter should contain information as to its expected/allowed type(s), at least if not available as a formal annotation,
3. That any study comparing comprehension (for experienced users) would start from a null hypothesis of "no difference",

then I'd think that the ability to use one and not the other as input to static analysis tools would already break the tie.

Show threadFranchescaFeb 1
@dwf @gvwilson wait, do you not know what type hints are? We aren’t talking about natural language comments.
Show threadFranchescaFeb 1
@dwf @gvwilson https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/python/type-hints-in-python/
Type Hints in Python - GeeksforGeeks

Your All-in-One Learning Portal: GeeksforGeeks is a comprehensive educational platform that empowers learners across domains-spanning computer science and programming, school education, upskilling, commerce, software tools, competitive exams, and more.

GeeksforGeeks
Show threaddwfFeb 1
@Frantasaur @gvwilson (not sure who you're addressing but I do and I'm sure Greg does, my comment was about the relative merits of using type hints/annotations as an additional form of documentation, versus presumably communicating that same information in the docstring instead)
Show threadFranchescaFeb 1
@dwf @gvwilson ah, yeh I see. The reference to natural language threw me, should have reread the whole thread again before responding 😅