If AI makes code cheap to write, should we choose languages that make incorrect code harder to produce?

• Rust can be harder for humans to write, but its type system and borrow checker reject whole classes of mistakes. AI lowers the writing cost; the compiler still enforces the rules.
• That changes the trade-off: optimise less for ease of writing and more for what the language can check automatically.
• This doesn't prove correct behaviour. Types and borrow checking cannot tell us whether we built the right thing. We still need tests and outside-in verification.
• Stronger typing doesn't solve architecture either. Ousterhout's argument still holds: complexity must be managed, however cheaply we generate code.
• The opportunity is not just faster programming. It's making stricter constraints practical, so fewer mistakes reach runtime or human review.
• https://rustify.rs/articles/rails-world-2026-keynote-dhh-hey-rust-ai-agents
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmSAYlu0NcY
• https://www.hillelwayne.com/talks/crossover-project/

• #ai
• #rust
• #software-engineering
• #verification