BAML
Fewer than 5 people recommend it so far, so there's no written verdict. Here is what commenters said.
3recommend
0warn against
Nov 14, 2025first mention
Apr 29, 2026latest mention
Why people recommend it
“I kind of like BAML https://boundaryml.com/ been using it in production”
“BAML (https://boundaryml.com/) is really great for handling structured outputs. It's what we use at my company.”
uses it at their companyon “LLM Structured Outputs Handbook”
Show 1 more
“which flies under the radar and imo is underrated”
Caveats and dissent
No one in these comments warned against it.
Often compared with
Who recommends it in their own words
From the makers not counted in the ranking
“We are working on making our programming language BAML turing-complete.”
“that workaround we've found works quite well”
Threads where it came up
- Ask HN: What Are You Working On? (May 2026) 1 mention
- Show HN: A new benchmark for testing LLMs for deterministic outputs 1 mention
- If Dspy is so great, why isn't anyone using it? 1 mention
- OpenClaw – Moltbot Renamed Again 1 mention
- LLM Structured Outputs Handbook 1 mention
- Structured outputs create false confidence 1 mention
Data: baml.json. Quotes are verbatim; the verdict and theme labels are written by a model from these comments, and every clause links to its sources.
All comments 8
“I'd also love to see a comparison with BAML”
“I kind of like BAML https://boundaryml.com/ been using it in production”
“There has been some work around this practically being tried out using it for structured data outputs from LLMs https://docs.boundaryml.com/guide/baml-advanced/prompt-optimization”
“BAML (https://boundaryml.com/) is really great for handling structured outputs. It's what we use at my company.”
“BAML is a DSL - write .baml files, generate code, get validated structured outputs.”
“is also trying to solve?”
“building with Python, BAML”
“which flies under the radar and imo is underrated”