Re: Current policy on AI-generated code in NumPy

> We will have to do some exploring to figure out how it best fits within 
> our culture of working

How about having an LLM privately generate a 30 second drama about, 
most-atomically, the checkin history of a given file? It could be 
user-tuned on [drama..accuracy] to get you through your day. Remember to 
leave enough error to keep you on your toes.

---
--

Phobrain.com

On 2026-02-06 14:02, Stefan van der Walt via NumPy-Discussion wrote:

> This is a very timely discussion for the community.
> 
> I put some of my thoughts on the topic in a recent blog post: 
> https://blog.scientific-python.org/scientific-python/community-considerations-around-ai/
> 
> Somewhere in between the die-hard-no-AI stance and full-on hype, I 
> think there are careful patterns of working with AI that can be 
> beneficial to our ecosystem. We will have to do some exploring to 
> figure out how it best fits within our culture of working, and what 
> good guardrails are.
> 
> Stéfan
> 
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2026, at 11:59, Charles R Harris via NumPy-Discussion 
> wrote:
> 
>> This is a common problem, so I expect there will be a lot of work on 
>> using  AI to review AI in the next year or two. What I don't see yet 
>> is anything that might check for license issues. However, if AI is 
>> used to rewrite properly licensed code this is probably less of a 
>> problem.
>> 
>> <snip>
>> 
>> Chuck
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/numpy-discussion.python.org
> Member address: [email protected]

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/numpy-discussion.python.org
Member address: [email protected]