Code as an "artifact". Means to an end? #
Agentic LLM's have changed what "code" means. It used be the end product of the software engineering lifecycle is "code" 📜 and there are purported arguments claiming that it is no more as LLM's themselves write "code". What remains is the spec as the "code" can be regenerated in N number of ways on demand. 🔨
Does that mean "code" is irrelevant and as long as you have a golden spec to derive "machine instructions"? As mused over by Elon Musk
This is exactly right. Source code is on the verge of becoming like assembly.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) The next step is getting rid of “source code” entirely and just making an efficient binary directly with AI.[https://t.co/g004yjMF95][August 3, 2026]
But this is semantics, if you move programming into LLMS, then your instructions/prompt and context become the "code". Yes, one higher level of abstraction but still "code". Traditional programming languages MIGHT need to change to accept this new paradigm properly though but I don't think they are going away. Programming languages exist for a different purpose, to reduce ambiguity in "specification" in natural language. "English" is a notoriously ambiguous language and you need vast amount of context to interpret what is said. Programming languages have been trying to bridge this by reducing the language surface to smaller more semantically well understood bits so there is no ambiguity when it comes to execution of the code.
So in short programming languages are not going away, unless you are willing to "interpretation" of specs "over time" as acceptable.
P.S I do think LLMs can be trivially made to generate binaries, but what you "assert" that the "binary" will do depends still on "code" albeit at a higher level 👼