diff --git a/aider/website/_posts/2024-08-14-code-in-json.md b/aider/website/_posts/2024-08-14-code-in-json.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..7fc8919db
--- /dev/null
+++ b/aider/website/_posts/2024-08-14-code-in-json.md
@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
+---
+title: LLMs are bad at returning code in json
+excerpt: LLMs write worse code if you ask them to return the code wrapped in json via a tool/function call.
+highlight_image: /assets/code-in-json.jpg
+draft: true
+nav_exclude: true
+---
+{% if page.date %}
+<p class="post-date">{{ page.date | date: "%B %d, %Y" }}</p>
+{% endif %}
+
+# LLMs are bad at returning code in json
+
+
+A lot of people wonder why aider doesn't have LLMs use tools or function calls to
+specify code edits.
+Instead, aider asks LLMs to return code edits in plain text, like this:
+
+````
+greeting.py
+```python
+<<<<<<< SEARCH
+def greeting():
+    print("Hello")
+=======
+def greeting():
+    print("Goodbye")
+>>>>>>> REPLACE
+```
+````
+
+People expect that it would be easier and more reliable
+for aider to parse a nicely formatted json 
+response more like this:
+
+```
+{
+    "filename": "greeting.py",
+    "start_line": 6,
+    "end_line": 7,
+    "new_content": "def greeting():\n    print(\"Goodbye\")\n"
+}
+```
+
+This seems even more tempting as LLMs get better tooling for reliably generating
+valid json, or even enforcing that it meets a specific schema.
+For example, OpenAI recently announced
+[strict enforcement of json responses]().
+
+The problem is that LLMs are bad a writing code when you ask them to wrap it
+into a json container.
+The json tooling around the LLM helps make sure it's valid json,
+which does solve an important problem. 
+LLMs used to frequently produce invalid json, so that's a big step forward.
+
+The problem remains, LLMs write worse code when they're asked to 
+emit it wrapped in json.
+In some sense this shouldn't be surprising.
+Just look at the very simple
+json example above, with the escaped 
+quotes `\"` quotes
+newlines `\n`
+mixed into the code.
+Coding is complicated enough without having to escape all the special characters too.
+
+If I asked you to write me a program, would you do a better job
+typing it into a text file or hand typing it as a properly escaped json string?
+
+## Quantifying the benefits of plain text
+
+
+Previous [benchmark results](/2023/07/02/benchmarks.html)
+showed
+the superiority of plain text coding compared to json-wrapped function calls,
+but they were done over a year ago.
+OpenAI's newly announced support for "strict" json seemed like a good reason to
+investigate whether the newest models are still handicapped by json-wrapping code.
+
+To find out, I benchmarked 3 of the strongest code editing models:
+
+- gpt-4o-2024-08-06
+- claude-3-5-sonnet-20240620
+- deepseek-coder (V2 0724)
+
+Each model was given one try to solve 
+[133 practice exercises from the Exercism python repository](/2023/07/02/benchmarks.html#the-benchmark).
+This is the standard aider "code editing" benchmark, except restricted to a single attempt.
+
+Each model ran through the benchmark with two strategies for returning code:
+
+- **Markdown** -- where the model simply returns the whole source code file in standard markdown triple-backtick fences.
+- **Tool call** -- where the model is told to use a function to return the whole source code file. This requires the LLM to wrap the code in json.
+
+The markdown strategy would return a program like this:
+
+````
+Here is the program you asked for which prints "Hello, world!":
+
+greeting.py
+```
+def greeting():
+    print("Hello")
+```
+````
+
+The tool strategy requires the LLM to call the `write_file` function with
+two parameters, like this:
+
+```
+{
+    "explanation": "Here is the program you asked for which prints \"Hello, world!\"",
+    "content": "def greeting():\n    print(\"Hello\")\n"
+}
+```
+
+Both of these formats avoid actually *editing* source files, to keep things as
+simple as possible.
+This makes the task much easier, since the LLM can emit the whole source file intact.
+LLMs find it much more challenging to correctly formulate instructions to edit
+portions of a file.
+
+We are simply testing the effects of json-wrapping on the LLMs ability to solve coding tasks.
+
+## Results
+
+All 3 models did significantly worse on the benchmark when asked to
+return json-wrapped code in a tool function call.