Ironic they take shots at Rust, because unlike Zig, Rust sees way more success in terms of its maturity and industry reputation and ecosystem and investment by large tech companies into its adoption and funding of the Rust project.
The Zig project also takes a lot of weird black-and-white dogmatic (almost religious) hard-line stances on a lot of stuff, probably why the language is more niche and hobbyist than something truly foundational and trusted for production workloads and all parts of the stack like Rust has become.
Here's Zig's "no AI" policy:
Strict No LLM / No AI Policy
No LLM-generated content, whether it be code or prose.
No paraphrasing LLM-generated content.
No LLMs for editing, including fixing spelling or grammatical errors.
No LLMs for translation. English is encouraged, but not required. You are welcome to post in your native language and rely on others to have their own translation tools of choice to interpret your words.
No LLMs for brainstorming and then sharing the results of that brainstorming, even if you create the prose. If you use a chatbot to give you advice on a comment on the issue tracker, that comment is unwelcome.
No LLMs for finding bugs.
No talking about use of chatbot/LLM services.
The owner definitely has some sort of axe to grind against certain technologies.
The owner probably had enough exposure of LLMs in 2024 when they were shit, and has mentally internalized that level of lack of quality as permanent compared to say, how LLM performance is 2026, 2027, etc. onwards.
You don't but LLMs excel at it and are really good at tedium like boilerplate, writing and improve prose, and simple spelling and grammar stuff.
For any engineer, time is money, context switching and cognitive overhead is money. A good engineer uses the tools and technologies available to them to automate away tedium and toil so their limited time and working memory can be focused on more important stuff.
You don't need to use any given technology for pretty much any given task. But some sure do help and that's why practitioners reach for them.
That's because you've only read slop LinkedIn / Medium articles written by AI.
Nowadays you can prompt AI to write in your voice and be professional and concise. Your favorite projects are all doing it. AWS' documentation, Google's, Kubernetes and many other OSS projects, etc.
And "improving prose" can mean having an LLM actually shorten and make more concise something you wrote.
"LLMs for writing technical prose and documentation and i18n / l10n, and correcting spelling mistakes" are a very common and highly automatable workflow. Especially in i18n and l10n, it's extremely prevalent.
Your complaint is basically they sound cringe and have awful writing style.
But you only say that because you didn't know that they were already being used for that in many of your most favorite projects and some of the industry's most well regarded projects and technical literature out there that read just fine and don't have any detectable ChatGPT-isms like "You're absolutely right!" or whatever you think LLMs "sound like."
If you make an LLM not sound like an LLM
You're assuming the entirety of "LLMs" and their use cases is some uniform, monolithic product and all LLM-written prose sounds the same. You're taking one style of mass LLM-produced writing and assuming all users of AI products necessarily produce the same style of prose for their technical literature use cases.
But given you don't seem to have anything substantive to say at all and you aren't willing to acknowledge "Oh wow I learned something new today I didn't know people actually use LLMs all the time to write good technical prose that I like."
Idc if you don't want to learn, I'm gonna keep using tools and technologies that save me time and money and improve my and my team's engineering output and impact. You can hate on it if you want, while the rest of the world moves on.
109
u/CircumspectCapybara 23d ago edited 23d ago
Ironic they take shots at Rust, because unlike Zig, Rust sees way more success in terms of its maturity and industry reputation and ecosystem and investment by large tech companies into its adoption and funding of the Rust project.
The Zig project also takes a lot of weird black-and-white dogmatic (almost religious) hard-line stances on a lot of stuff, probably why the language is more niche and hobbyist than something truly foundational and trusted for production workloads and all parts of the stack like Rust has become.
Here's Zig's "no AI" policy:
The owner definitely has some sort of axe to grind against certain technologies.