zlacker

> It also has TypeScript which pairs well with agentic coding loops

The language syntax has nothing to do with it pairing well with agentic coding loops.

Considering how close Typescript and C# are syntactically, and C#'s speed advantage over JS among many other things would make C# the main language for building Agents. It is not and that's because the early SDKs were JS and Python.

>>mrcsha+(OP)
Typescript is probably generally a good LLM language because - static types - tons and tons of training data

Kind of tangent but I used to think static types were a must-have for LLM generated code. But the most magical and impressively awesome thing I’ve seen for LLM code generation is “calva backseat driver”, a vscode extension that lets copilot evaluate clojure expressions and generally do REPL stuff.

It can write MUCH cleaner and more capable code, using all sorts of libraries that it’s unfamiliar with, because it can mess around and try stuff just like a human would. It’s mind blowingly cool!!

>>mrcsha+(OP)
> C#'s speed advantage over JS among many other things would make C# the main language

Nobody cares about this, JS is plenty fast for LLM needs. If maximum performance was necessary, you're better off using Go because of fast compiler and better performance.

>>wiseow+z4
> Nobody cares about this

And that was my point. The choice of using JS/TS for LLM stuff was made for us based on initial wave of SDK availabilities. Nothing to do with language merits.

>>chamom+u3
Clojure is such an underrated language for vibe coding for this very reason.

Makes me wonder what a theoretical “best possible language for vibe coding” would look like

>>miguel+DC
whoa, instant upgrade. thanks!

>>mrcsha+f7
This has always been the case. The Java and C# ecosystems prioritise stability and scale. They wait for ideas to prove themselves in other languages like Erlang, Python, Go, Scala, and so on, and then adopt the successful ones. Last-mover advantage. That said, there are some caveats. Java is still missing value types, while C# has moved quickly with async/await rather than adopting models like goroutines or virtual threads, which can sometimes limit concurrency ergonomics for the developer.

>>wiseow+z4
>If maximum performance was necessary, you're better off using Go because of fast compiler and better performance.

That's not true, if anything, C# is faster and also compiles fast enough.

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

>>mrsmrt+ty1
C# AOT "compiles fast enough" compared to Go or are you looking at C# JIT ?

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...