Simon Willison’s Weblog

go-size-analyzer (via) The Go ecosystem is really good at tooling. I just learned about this tool for analyzing the size of Go binaries using a pleasing treemap view of their bundled dependencies.

You can install and run the tool locally, but it's also compiled to WebAssembly and hosted at gsa.zxilly.dev - which means you can open compiled Go binaries and analyze them directly in your browser.

I tried it with a 8.1MB macOS compiled copy of my Go Showboat tool and got this:

# 4:10 pm / go, webassembly, showboat

Ladybird adopts Rust, with help from AI (via) Really interesting case-study from Andreas Kling on advanced, sophisticated use of coding agents for ambitious coding projects with critical code. After a few years hoping Swift's platform support outside of the Apple ecosystem would mature they switched tracks to Rust their memory-safe language of choice, starting with an AI-assisted port of a critical library:

Our first target was LibJS , Ladybird's JavaScript engine. The lexer, parser, AST, and bytecode generator are relatively self-contained and have extensive test coverage through test262, which made them a natural starting point.

I used Claude Code and Codex for the translation. This was human-directed, not autonomous code generation. I decided what to port, in what order, and what the Rust code should look like. It was hundreds of small prompts, steering the agents where things needed to go. [...]

The requirement from the start was byte-for-byte identical output from both pipelines. The result was about 25,000 lines of Rust, and the entire port took about two weeks. The same work would have taken me multiple months to do by hand. We’ve verified that every AST produced by the Rust parser is identical to the C++ one, and all bytecode generated by the Rust compiler is identical to the C++ compiler’s output. Zero regressions across the board.

Having an existing conformance testing suite of the quality of test262 is a huge unlock for projects of this magnitude, and the ability to compare output with an existing trusted implementation makes agentic engineering much more of a safe bet.

# 6:52 pm / browsers, javascript, ai, rust, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, andreas-kling, ladybird, coding-agents, swift, conformance-suites, agentic-engineering

The Claude C Compiler: What It Reveals About the Future of Software. On February 5th Anthropic's Nicholas Carlini wrote about a project to use parallel Claudes to build a C compiler on top of the brand new Opus 4.6

Chris Lattner (Swift, LLVM, Clang, Mojo) knows more about C compilers than most. He just published this review of the code.

Some points that stood out to me:

• Good software depends on judgment, communication, and clear abstraction. AI has amplified this.
• AI coding is automation of implementation, so design and stewardship become more important.
• Manual rewrites and translation work are becoming AI-native tasks, automating a large category of engineering effort.

Chris is generally impressed with CCC (the Claude C Compiler):

Taken together, CCC looks less like an experimental research compiler and more like a competent textbook implementation, the sort of system a strong undergraduate team might build early in a project before years of refinement. That alone is remarkable.

It's a long way from being a production-ready compiler though:

Several design choices suggest optimization toward passing tests rather than building general abstractions like a human would. [...] These flaws are informative rather than surprising, suggesting that current AI systems excel at assembling known techniques and optimizing toward measurable success criteria, while struggling with the open-ended generalization required for production-quality systems.

The project also leads to deep open questions about how agentic engineering interacts with licensing and IP for both open source and proprietary code:

If AI systems trained on decades of publicly available code can reproduce familiar structures, patterns, and even specific implementations, where exactly is the boundary between learning and copying?

# 11:58 pm / c, compilers, open-source, ai, ai-assisted-programming, anthropic, claude, nicholas-carlini, coding-agents, agentic-engineering

London Stock Exchange: Raspberry Pi Holdings plc. Striking graph illustrating stock in the UK Raspberry Pi holding company spiking on Tuesday:

The Telegraph credited excitement around OpenClaw:

Raspberry Pi's stock price has surged 30pc in two days, amid chatter on social media that the company's tiny computers can be used to power a popular AI chatbot.

Users have turned to Raspberry Pi's small computers to run a technology known as OpenClaw, a viral AI personal assistant. A flood of posts about the practice have been viewed millions of times since the weekend.

Reuters also credit a stock purchase by CEO Eben Upton:

Shares in Raspberry Pi rose as much as 42% on Tuesday in ‌a record two‑day rally after CEO Eben Upton bought ‌stock in the beaten‑down UK computer hardware firm, halting a months‑long slide, ​as chatter grew that its products could benefit from low‑cost artificial‑intelligence projects.

Two London traders said the driver behind the surge was not clear, though the move followed a filing showing Upton bought ‌about 13,224 pounds ⁠worth of shares at around 282 pence each on Monday.

# 11:54 pm / ai, generative-ai, raspberry-pi, llms, ai-agents, openclaw

How I think about Codex. Gabriel Chua (Developer Experience Engineer for APAC at OpenAI) provides his take on the confusing terminology behind the term "Codex", which can refer to a bunch of of different things within the OpenAI ecosystem:

In plain terms, Codex is OpenAI’s software engineering agent, available through multiple interfaces, and an agent is a model plus instructions and tools, wrapped in a runtime that can execute tasks on your behalf. [...]

At a high level, I see Codex as three parts working together:

Codex = Model + Harness + Surfaces [...]

• Model + Harness = the Agent
• Surfaces = how you interact with the Agent

He defines the harness as "the collection of instructions and tools", which is notably open source and lives in the openai/codex repository.

Gabriel also provides the first acknowledgment I've seen from an OpenAI insider that the Codex model family are directly trained for the Codex harness:

Codex models are trained in the presence of the harness. Tool use, execution loops, compaction, and iterative verification aren’t bolted on behaviors — they’re part of how the model learns to operate. The harness, in turn, is shaped around how the model plans, invokes tools, and recovers from failure.

# 3:53 pm / definitions, openai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, codex-cli

Andrej Karpathy talks about “Claws”. Andrej Karpathy tweeted a mini-essay about buying a Mac Mini ("The apple store person told me they are selling like hotcakes and everyone is confused") to tinker with Claws:

I'm definitely a bit sus'd to run OpenClaw specifically [...] But I do love the concept and I think that just like LLM agents were a new layer on top of LLMs, Claws are now a new layer on top of LLM agents, taking the orchestration, scheduling, context, tool calls and a kind of persistence to a next level.

Looking around, and given that the high level idea is clear, there are a lot of smaller Claws starting to pop out. For example, on a quick skim NanoClaw looks really interesting in that the core engine is ~4000 lines of code (fits into both my head and that of AI agents, so it feels manageable, auditable, flexible, etc.) and runs everything in containers by default. [...]

Anyway there are many others - e.g. nanobot, zeroclaw, ironclaw, picoclaw (lol @ prefixes). [...]

Not 100% sure what my setup ends up looking like just yet but Claws are an awesome, exciting new layer of the AI stack.

Andrej has an ear for fresh terminology (see vibe coding, agentic engineering) and I think he's right about this one, too: "Claw" is becoming a term of art for the entire category of OpenClaw-like agent systems - AI agents that generally run on personal hardware, communicate via messaging protocols and can both act on direct instructions and schedule tasks.

It even comes with an established emoji 🦞

# 12:37 am / definitions, ai, andrej-karpathy, generative-ai, llms, ai-agents, openclaw, agentic-engineering

Taalas serves Llama 3.1 8B at 17,000 tokens/second (via) This new Canadian hardware startup just announced their first product - a custom hardware implementation of the Llama 3.1 8B model (from July 2024) that can run at a staggering 17,000 tokens/second.

I was going to include a video of their demo but it's so fast it would look more like a screenshot. You can try it out at chatjimmy.ai.

They describe their Silicon Llama as “aggressively quantized, combining 3-bit and 6-bit parameters.” Their next generation will use 4-bit - presumably they have quite a long lead time for baking out new models!

# 10:10 pm / ai, generative-ai, llama, llms, llm-performance

ggml.ai joins Hugging Face to ensure the long-term progress of Local AI (via) I don't normally cover acquisition news like this, but I have some thoughts.

It's hard to overstate the impact Georgi Gerganov has had on the local model space. Back in March 2023 his release of llama.cpp made it possible to run a local LLM on consumer hardware. The original README said:

The main goal is to run the model using 4-bit quantization on a MacBook. [...] This was hacked in an evening - I have no idea if it works correctly.

I wrote about trying llama.cpp out at the time in Large language models are having their Stable Diffusion moment:

I used it to run the 7B LLaMA model on my laptop last night, and then this morning upgraded to the 13B model—the one that Facebook claim is competitive with GPT-3.

Meta's original LLaMA release depended on PyTorch and their FairScale PyTorch extension for running on multiple GPUs, and required CUDA and NVIDIA hardware. Georgi's work opened that up to a much wider range of hardware and kicked off the local model movement that has continued to grow since then.

Hugging Face are already responsible for the incredibly influential Transformers library used by the majority of LLM releases today. They've proven themselves a good steward for that open source project, which makes me optimistic for the future of llama.cpp and related projects.

This section from the announcement looks particularly promising:

Going forward, our joint efforts will be geared towards the following objectives:

• Towards seamless "single-click" integration with the transformers library. The transformers framework has established itself as the 'source of truth' for AI model definitions. Improving the compatibility between the transformers and the ggml ecosystems is essential for wider model support and quality control.
• Better packaging and user experience of ggml-based software. As we enter the phase in which local inference becomes a meaningful and competitive alternative to cloud inference, it is crucial to improve and simplify the way in which casual users deploy and access local models. We will work towards making llama.cpp ubiquitous and readily available everywhere, and continue partnering with great downstream projects.

Given the influence of Transformers, this closer integration could lead to model releases that are compatible with the GGML ecosystem out of the box. That would be a big win for the local model ecosystem.

I'm also excited to see investment in "packaging and user experience of ggml-based software". This has mostly been left to tools like Ollama and LM Studio. ggml-org released LlamaBarn last year - "a macOS menu bar app for running local LLMs" - and I'm hopeful that further investment in this area will result in more high quality open source tools for running local models from the team best placed to deliver them.

# 5:12 pm / open-source, transformers, ai, generative-ai, llama, local-llms, llms, hugging-face, llama-cpp