What is the policy/attitude towards LLM contributions in Coalton?

[zyd-n]

@stylewarning

Hi, I'm looking over all the active Lisp, Scheme and Lisp-adjacent languages and implementations to see how projects contributors and maintainers are responding to the proliferation of LLMs. I don't see anything that resembles an official 'policy' or guideline to LLM-generated/assisted/enhanced/based/etc contributions.

I see that Claude has contributed fixes to typos and grammatical issues. Are further LLM contributions (code or otherwise) welcomed in Coalton by the maintainers and contributors?

[stylewarning]

Thank you for asking. There's no documented policy yet, but it's basically what I said here: #1762 (comment)

TL;DR (but do look at that link);

• Don't waste maintainer's time with stuff you yourself don't understand.

• No omnibus overhauls or refactors without some kind of preliminary discussion.

• You review it with your eyes before I review it with mine.

I'm overall favorable to the use of AI, but I don't condone blind trust. Make AI work for you, not replace you. :)