Adam Leventhal

It makes it more rigorous.

Like you've actually like, I mean, on the one hand, it's like, oh, okay, really?

I mean, as you say, Adam, like maybe don't spot an interaction.

But like, hey, actually, no, now you can though.

You know what I mean?

And I think that like, I just see this in lots and lots of places where we are going to make our infrastructure actually more robust because we can now go pick up a bunch of work that we just weren't going to get to realistically.

We, the people who work on this lower level infrastructure, we're just not going to get to.

Out lazy Adam, will you?

So I would argue, Adam, that you have embodied all three of Larry Wall's famous virtues of a programmer.

That you've shown your laziness, your impatience, and your hubris in a stroke.

But this point of laziness is really important because we all know, and we kind of speak about euphemistically as laziness, but we all know that a hallmark of good software engineering

is coming up with powerful abstractions.

And when you are kind of repeating code multiple times, that part of your brain is like, ah, this is not the right abstraction.

And because Adam, both you and Rain mentioned like, ah, I would have made this a proc macro, or I would have done something

Because I think we over-index on that, where we're like, then this whole dry thing, the do not repeat yourself, where you become so over-indexed on it that you then do things that are actually...

either generating some optimal artifacts or it's like, there are times where it's just like, actually, it's just not that big of a deal to have code that is like similar, but slightly different in three places.

Like it's okay.

We're all going to live, but we really resist doing that.

And LLMs make it easier to kind of do that.

A hundred percent.