licjon

Who cares if it is a bottleneck or not? Can you type faster than an LLM? Send the code to the real bottleneck and spend your time taking a walk outside or something.

I think that LLMs have made moot all the arguments against using Common Lisp besides lack of an ecosystem. Macros are hard to write and debug--not so much anymore. Not enough people know Common Lisp--you don't need them. Since finding common lisp MCPs, I have had so much fun making things in Common Lisp.

Even if all the negatives are true, I am skeptical that it has a measurable impact on productivity. There are often outside factors that put a ceiling on what can be done anyway, with high productivity just causing days of waiting instead of any tangible reward.

Is there a router or wrapper that provides a real-time cost estimation for alternative settings? Obviously, you can't predict exact output tokens without running the inference, but a tool that calculates the exact input cost across models and applies a historical average for the output tokens could be useful. Like, you run a task on Sonnet, and it estimates: "Based on your input tokens and a 1:1 output ratio, this would have cost $X on Opus at a low effort level."

By not offering a refund, Sony has done damage to the moral superiority claim that pirated media is theft. If they can effectively steal something you bought, then they can't claim the moral high ground, just the fact of legality.

For common lisp, cl-mcp is great for this (https://github.com/cl-ai-project/cl-mcp). I have not had any parentheses issues while using claude opus and cl-mcp. Other lisp mcps are probably also good, but I can only vouch for cl-mcp.