zlacker

It's very good (in our experience, YMMV of course) when/llm write prototype with python and then port automatically 1-1 to Rust for perf. We write prototypes in JS and Python and then it gets auto ported to Rust and we have been doing this for about 1 year for all our projects where it makes sense; in the past months it has been incredibly good with claude code; it is absolutely automatic; we run it in a loop until all (many handwritten in the original language) tests succeed.

>>anonzz+(OP)
IDK what's going on in your shop but that sounds like a terrible idea!

- Libraries don't necessarily map one-to-one from Python to Rust/etc.

- Paradigms don't map neatly; Python is OO, Rust leans more towards FP.

- Even if the code be re-written in Rust, it's probably not the most Rustic (?) approach or the most performant.

>>behnam+93
It doesn't map anything 1 to 1, it uses our guidelines and architecture for porting it which works well. I did say YMMV anyway; it works well for us.

>>anonzz+b6
Sorry, so basically you're saying there are two separate guidelines, one for Python and one for Rust, and you have the LLM write it first in Python and then Rust. But I still don't understand why it would be any better than writing the code in Rust in one go? Why "priming" it in Python would improve the result in any way?

Also, what happens when bug fixes are needed? Again first in Py and then in Rs?

>>anonzz+(OP)
Why not get it to write it in Rust in the first place?

>>abrook+eg
Presumably the thought experiment hasn’t matured to that point yet.