What you've done here is build a transpiler that takes a lightweight pseudocode representation and turns it into a concrete and executable form in another langu

What you've done here is build a transpiler that takes a lightweight pseudocode representation and turns it into a concrete and executable form in another language. There are good reasons for doing this: I might want to write something in Ruby (the way I think about problems might fit that language best), but might want the artefact I check in to be Python (my colleagues might prefer it), and my build pipeline might want to transpile it into C, and then throw it through a compiler with a pile of optimisations to make it all scream at 100x the performance my original code could run in, in Ruby. Hell, why not make the Ruby interpreter just a call out to an LLM to get it turned into byte code? Of course this is all starting to sound a little absurd because it is. We're reinventing a domain that has had decades of research into it using an expensive, slow, stochastic black box. Where there's some utility is in a language where I can be a little vague, but that doesn't have all the semantic confusion of natural language. But without defining that as a formal grammar (and therefore implementable in LLVM, JVM, whatever), you may end up with the worst of both Worlds.