miniblog.

I've had a surprising amount of success asking an LLM to try projects in my toy programming language and report language or tooling issues. Today it noticed that foo(bar,) is syntactically legal but assert(bar,) is not. The parser error is poor in this case too. A real UX bug!

I think you could build an interesting IDE with a tiny embedded LLM in addition to the usual tooling. Features like 'extract method' would be much nicer if an LLM could provide a name. Choosing a good name is virtually impossible from just a typed AST.

I find it fascinating how some businesses have scheduled downtime for their websites (e.g. my electricity provider last weekend), but others don't. I suspect it's primarily culture. You generally need to turn off electricity to do work, so your other tooling may reflect that.