Re: Policy on use of LLM tools and bug fixes
Andrew Pinski via Gcc <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.devel,gmane.comp.gcc.fortran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALvbMcBa08=YWyp9QAC72Ts3GgZY9McRh88YZAc_AbVvt71vvw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 7:28 AM Richard Earnshaw (foss) via Gcc <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 14/03/2026 19:02, Jeffrey Law via Gcc wrote: > > > > > > On 3/14/2026 12:59 PM, Jerry D via Gcc wrote: > >> Some of the various LLM services available appear to be getting very good at generating bug fixes. I realize that one must be careful as these tools can at times do things that may be superfluous to the actual fix. By superfluous I mean lines of code that are not relevant to the lines that fix it. > >> > >> I saw some discussions of this subject for gcc somewhere and wanted to know if we have a specific policy established / documented somewhere regarding this. > > The steering committee is trying to figure out a good policy right now. > > > > Jeff > > I notice that the Linux kernel recently adopted the following policy: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > > Has there been any progress on GCC yet? Note openjdk has the following Interim Policy on it: https://openjdk.org/legal/ai Which is the opposite of the Linux kernel. > > R.