Today, AI is rapidly changing the way we build software, and the pace of that change is only accelerating. If our goal is to make programming more productive, then building at the frontier of AI and software feels like the highest-leverage thing we can do.
It is increasingly clear to me that Codex is that frontier. And by bringing Astral’s tooling and expertise to OpenAI, we’re putting ourselves in a position to push it forward. After joining the Codex team, we’ll continue building our open source tools, explore ways they can work more seamlessly with Codex, and expand our reach to think more broadly about the future of software development.
25 Comments
galaxy_nova@lemmy.world · 47 pts · 148d
The ensloppening of some of my favorite tools begins?
siera@jlai.lu · 12 pts · 147d
The developers were already genAI users.
But now I fear that the tutorial will include an "openai init", and other non-deterministic subscription-based commands for ruff and uv and that will be what is pushed.
Squizzy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 147d
What genAI? I've yet to see genAI
BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com · 33 pts · 148d
FFS, first Bun, now Astral... It's a shame, uv is such a useful tool in the Python ecosystem.
prism@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 26 pts · 148d
Sigh. I knew uv and ruff were too good to be true. Just hope the community can fork before it all goes to crap.
a_good_hunter@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 148d
Count down to forks in 3... 2... 1...
siera@jlai.lu · 10 pts · 147d
But which form will survive ?
I want tools from the python foundation ! (I kinda hoped ruff and UV were taken over by the pypa)
TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 146d
You can fork today. It'll work forever.
Orygin@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 146d
Forever? When every new python version breaks compatibility with the previous?
TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 146d
They're compiled rust programs.
Orygin@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 146d
Yes but the language ecosystem is a moving target
fastfomo7@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 22 pts · 147d
I can't express how disappointed I am
axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -16 pts · 147d
This just pure fearmongering and FUD.
Calm yourself.
TheAgeOfSuperboredom@lemmy.ca · 16 pts · 147d
I find that Python requires a fair bit of discipline to keep it readable, and I've seen some very unreadable code written by people. Vibe coding with Python's dynamic nature seems like a match made in hell.
galaxy_nova@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 147d
This is true although that’s what enforcing strict type checking and good linting is supposed to help with. I think it’s partially an issue that you can kinda just type what you think and not everyone thinks efficiently/ programmer-y
Edited for clarity
TheAgeOfSuperboredom@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 147d
Agreed! I think both linting and type checking are extremely important to Python, but it's also an extra step that far too many people just don't take. And honestly, I used to get tripped up sometimes with setting up Python tooling before I started using uv.
Unfortunately I also have to work with the occasional Python script that someone just slapped together, and that's something far too easy to do in Python. It does kind of remind me of vibe coding. Initial velocity seems high, but if you're not thinking about it, long term maintenance tanks.
That's not to say Python is bad, and there is certainly a lot of good Python code out there too. But it's a language that does make it easy to make a mess, which will probably be compounded by LLMs.
eager_eagle@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 147d
It's manageable if you pass along these rules to the LLM. I've actually had more success asking the LLM than giving code reviews to some interns, and even someone who coded professionally before.
badgermurphy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 147d
eager_eagle@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 146d
Ok, I'm not suggesting replacing humans with AI and I despise companies trying to do this unsustainable practice.
With that out of the way, I'll restate that LLMs follow some rules more reliably than humans today. It's also easier to give feedback when you don't have to worry about coming across as a pedantic prick for pointing out the smaller things.
On your point that LLMs are not improving; well, agents and tooling are definitely improving. 6 months ago I would need to babysit an agent to implement a moderately complex feature that touches a handful of files. Nowadays, not as much. It might get some things wrong, but usually because it lacks context rather than ability. They can write tests, run them, and iterate until it passes, then I can just look at the diff to make sure the tests and solution makes sense. Again, something that would fail to yield decent results just in the last year.
badgermurphy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 146d
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 147d
AI is infact detracting from innovation
Wispy2891@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 147d
Why?
Codex uses npm, no? Why do they need ruff and uv??
megaman@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 147d
I just spent three weeks getting work to whitelist uv 😭😭😭
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 147d
Poetry is not yet owned by a slop factory.
axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -4 pts · 147d
UV is open source.
Dont gaslight yourself thinking it's suddenly going to kill your grandmother now or something.
axum@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 147d
If all this does is fund astral and by extension
uvI don't see a problem here.Hell, I'd take ai Corp money to fund making good tools for the community, as it's one less stack of cash being used on bullshit datacenters.
Satomune@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 147d
HalfAFrisbee@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 147d
Read the room dude.