Egregoros · Phoenix Framework

Post

Remote status

Context

Phantasm

18w

@s8n @HatkeshiatorTND @lain
>So they do not want any code in the codebase that none of them understands or is willing to maintain.
This is completely the same with human contributions. You don't merge something you don't want to deal with later. Simple as.

lain

@lain@fediffusion.art remote

18w

@phnt @HatkeshiatorTND @s8n i some cases i'd be a lot more willing to merge both LLM and human code because I can get two or three LLM reviewers to look through it instead of just tired old me.

Q.U.I.N.N.

@icedquinn@blob.cat remote

18w

@lain @HatkeshiatorTND @phnt @s8n i don't think they're concerned about the QC aspect. there are projects which have QC policies about ai assisted code and they're pretty transparent about the 100% inspection policy.

hat

@HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social remote

18w

@icedquinn @lain @phnt @s8n are you implying certain projects may be making decisions based on something other than practicality? such as, perhaps... ideology?
unfathomable.

lain

@lain@fediffusion.art remote

18w

@HatkeshiatorTND @icedquinn @phnt @s8n i mean, if they want to be a by-humans-for-humans community feelgood project, that's great, but i just never had the impression that zig was about that. I guess i was just wrong.

hat

@HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social remote

18w

@lain @icedquinn @phnt @s8n project culture is a very real thing and everybody has convictions. there's always a margin where you'll refuse +0.5% productivity on principle, ditto +5000% productivity.
this is why we have forks! forking a project can help it continue when the culture is no longer conducive to the project's spirit. if zig happens to be in the hands of people who care deeply about not accepting ai contributions, i don't want or need the project reft from their hold or anything. i can just operate a fork.
which is what bun is doing, which is why bun/zig is going to go places zig/zig isn't.

Q.U.I.N.N.

@icedquinn@blob.cat remote

18w

@HatkeshiatorTND @lain @phnt @s8n
> DORA 2025 found that AI adoption led to +154% PR size, +91% review time, and +9% more bugs shipped. Reviewers are drowning in noise. (Ataraxy Labs, https://github.com/ataraxy-labs/inspect)

Replying to @icedquinn@blob.cat

⚡⛥ Maður Margvalds ⛦⚡

@toiletpaper@shitposter.world remote

18w

@icedquinn @HatkeshiatorTND @lain @phnt @s8n

That makes sense. I can understand not wanting to deal with a bunch of noise, but having a hard limit on no LLM generated code seems like a losing battle, even in the short term. The real criteria should be whether the code is sound, not by whom/what it was created. Also if the amount of AI slop is becoming an issue, that's a perfect use-case for leveraging LLMs as an initial review mechanism. Fight fire with fire.

Replies

Replying to @toiletpaper@shitposter.world

Q.U.I.N.N.

@icedquinn@blob.cat remote

18w

@toiletpaper @HatkeshiatorTND @lain @phnt @s8n there are people that are vibe maintaining but also mostly the quality control side is just shuttering PRs unless they know you and the whole thing is going to reputation networks