Fractal Native – 不优化您的人工智能工作流程
你好，
问题：我想在使用人工智能验证由人工智能实现的功能是否完全符合开发者的设想时，减少开发体验的摩擦。但我现在陷入困境……
背景：
首先，我想我们可以将提示形式化，使其成为代码。这个想法是：一个项目规范，其中特定的词定义行为，改变这些词就会改变程序。每个词都是一个函数，因此按下“转到...(F12)”会让你进入一个嵌套的行为（因此称为“分形”）。所以这将是一个由人工智能编译器解释的元规范语言，同时仍然使用自然语言（因此称为“本地”）。
但这基于一个错误的假设——即开发者愿意学习一种新的语言（这种语言比TypeScript、Java或Go更不正式，但仍然是有规范的）。我认为这种情况已经不可能发生了。下一个编程语言将完全是英语（或任何其他自然语言）。
其次，我和一个朋友讨论了这个想法，我们意识到测试是行为的一个很好的描述（当然也有一些例外）。创意继续发展，长话短说，这就是语言规范：https://github.com/slowestmonkey/fractal/blob/main/README.md
那么我为什么会陷入困境呢？我意识到，仅仅提示人工智能并获得正确的行为对于工程师来说是不够的。除非我理解它是如何以及为什么以那种方式构建的，否则我无法自信地说“这有意义”。这是我的领悟：https://www.conjectly.com/thoughts/7
因此，我在寻求帮助或建议：
- 这个想法是否以及如何可以进一步发展
- 我还犯了哪些其他错误的假设
请分享你的想法，谢谢。
查看原文
Hello there,<p>Problem: I wanted to reduce DX friction when using ai to verify that ai-implemented features perform exactly what the developer had in mind. And I'm stuck now...<p>Context:
First, I thought we could formalize prompts so that they become the code. The idea: a project spec where particular words define behavior, and changing the words changes the program. Each word is a function, so pressing "Go To... (F12)" drops you into a nested behavior (hence "Fractal"). So it would be a meta-spec language interpreted by an ai compiler while still using native language (hence "Native").<p>But this rests on a wrong assumption — that developers are open to learning a new language (less formalized than TS, Java, or Go, yet still formalized). I don't think that can happen anymore. The next coding language is purely English (or any other natural language).<p>Second, I discussed the idea with a friend and we realized that tests are a nice descriptor of behaviors (with quite some exceptions ofc). Ideation continued, and long story short, here's the Language Spec: https://github.com/slowestmonkey/fractal/blob/main/README.md<p>So why am I stuck? I've come to the realization that prompting ai and receiving correct behavior isn't enough for engineer. I can't confidently say "it makes sense" unless I understand how and why it was built that way. Here's the realization: https://www.conjectly.com/thoughts/7<p>And so I'm asking for help or advice on:
- if and how this idea can go further
- what other wrong assumptions I've made<p>Please share your thoughts and thank you.