I was actually meaning to post this as an Ask HN question, but never found the time to word it well. Basically, what happens to new frameworks and technologies in the age of widespread LLM-assisted coding? Will users be reluctants to adopt bleeding-edge tools because the LLMs can't assist as well? Will companies behind the big frameworks put more resources towards documenting them in a way that makes it easy for LLMs to learn from?
Actually, here in my corner of EU, only the prominent big tech backed well documented and battle tested tools are most marketable skills. So, React, 50 new jobs, but you worked with Svelte/Solidjs, what is that? Java/PHP/Python/Ruby/JS, adequate jobs. Go/Rust/Zig/Crystal/Nim, what are these? While Go has some popularity in recent years and I can spot Rust once in a blue moon. Anything involving requiring near metal work is always C/C++.
Availability of documentation and tooling, widespread adaptation and access to already-trained-at-someone-else's-dime possibility is deemed safe for hiring decision. Sometimes, the narrow tech is spotted in the wild, but it was mostly some senior/staff engineer wanted to experiment something which became part of production because management saw no issue, will sometimes open some doors for practitioners of those stack but the probability is akin to getting hit by lightning strike.
This is just reality outside of the early stage startup. The US tech industry and its social networks are very dominated by trendy startup ideas, but the reality is still the major tried-and-true platforms.
Another way to look at it: working bleeding edge will become a competitive advantage and a signal to how competent the team is. „Do they consume it” vs „do they own it”.
Constantly chasing the latest tech trends has probably done more harm than good, because more often than not, it turns out that the latest hype technology actually does not deliver what the marketing had promised. Look at NoSQL and MongoDB especially as recent examples. Most people who blindly jumped on the MDB bandwagon would have probably been better off just using Postgres, and they later had to spend a lot of resources migrating away from Mongo.
To me constantly chasing the latest trends means lack of experience in a team and absence of focus on what is actually important, which is delivering the product.
This already happens. Is your new framework popular on GitHub and on Stack Overflow is a metric people use. LLMs are currently mostly capable of just adapting documentation, blog posts, and answers on SO. So they add a thin veneer on top of those resources.
On one hand, yes, when it comes to picking tools for new projects, LLM awareness of them is now a consideration in large companies.
And at the same time, those same companies are willing to spend time and effort to ensure that their own tooling is well-represented in the training sets for SOTA models. To the point where they work directly with the corresponding teams at OpenAI etc.
And yes, it does mean that the barrier to entry for new competitors is that much higher, especially when they don't have the resources to do the same.
I expect it will wind up like search engines where you either submit urls for indexing/inclusion or wait for a crawl to pick your information up.
Until the tech catches up it will have a stifling effect on progress toward and adoption of new things (which imo is pretty common of new/immature tech, eg how culture has more generally kind of stagnated since the early 2000s)
Hopefully, tools can adapt to integrate documentation better. I've already run into this with GitHub Copilot, trying to use Svelte 5 with it is a battle despite it being released most of a year ago.
There’s another future where reasoning models get better with larger context windows, and you can throw a new programming language or framework at it and it will do a pretty good job.
