zlacker

right: we don't use programming languages instead of natural language simply to make it hard. For the same reason, we use a restricted dialect of natural language when writing math proofs -- using constrained languages reduces ambiguity and provides guardrails for understanding. It gives us some hope of understanding the behavior of systems and having confidence in their outputs

There are levels of this though -- there are few instances where you actually need formal correctness. For most software, the stakes just aren't that high, all you need is predictable behavior in the "happy path", and to be within some forgiving neighborhood of "correct".

That said, those championing AI have done a very poor job at communicating the value of constrained languages, instead preferring to parrot this (decades and decades and decades old) dream of "specify systems in natural language"

>>vector+(OP)
Algebraic notation was a feature that took 1000+ years to arrive at. Beforehand mathematics was described in natural language. "The square on the hypotenuse..." etc.