What happens next to software development?

The economics of re-usable code will shape the future profession of software development
ai
programming
Author

Matt Hall

Published

June 19, 2026

The question “What happens next to open source?” came up several times at the EAGE open source workshop last week. And in various guises: funding stability, maintainer fatigue, supply chain security, and so on. But the biggest concern was the effect of AI on software development — under the assumption that agentic coding actually works in the medium and long term, which I think is not a given.

So, if coding agents produce useful code and their role grows, what happens? It’s a good question, but I think it can be broadened: What happens next to software development?

My take: token price is everything.

If coding agents work and tokens are cheap then everything we know changes. It becomes a manifestation of Rich Sutton’s bitter lesson: human ideas and patterns can and will be beaten with compute. No need to store code: just generate what you need, when you need it. No more repos! Forget JIT compiling — JIT everything!

In the recent past, in the world of nearly-free tokens, an agent in need of a wavelet (say) will likely prefer to implement the algorithm from scratch in preference to using a library. If code is free and programming is solved, then why bother looking for a library? (Wait, then why use Python? Why not generate C? Wait, why not assembly? Or machine code? Or just generate the binary bitstream straight into memory?)

OK, let’s calm down — if agentic coding works then for sure tokens will not be cheap.

So tokens will be expensive and “synthetic labour” will cost real money — if you follow the news, you know the AI revenue maximization function is already running. Now we will have to motivate agents to re-use code (and languages!), because repos and libraries serve to ‘freeze’ invested labour. With a Scrooge criterion, agents and their human minders will re-discover DRY, the advantages of open source, long-lived teams, and so on. And yeah, it will be pretty annoying because we know all this, remember?

Today I think there’s reasonable evidence to suggest that, far from being inclined to economise, large language models use more tokens than they need. They tend to produce a lot of code, often repeat themselves, and always seek to prolong interaction: LLMs are Scrooge on Christmas Day, except you’re paying for all of it!

Without a strong compulsion to minimize cost — a frugality function or re-use requirement that will of course drive token prices further up — I don’t know how this changes.