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!

Implementation chicken: When there's an obvious feature gap in an ecosystem and everyone is waiting for someone else to write it. I see this most frequently with OSS toolchains. Basic functionality in new programming languages is another common scenario.

I'm debating whether `from foo import *` is a bad feature for my toy programming language. Forcing `import foo as f` and later `f::bar()` is so much more amenable to local static analysis. You also don't get issues with name clashes. It's certainly convenient though.