Re: GCC LLM policy adopted

Sean Whitton <[email protected]> writes:

> - It clearly distinguishes including LLM output in what gets committed
>   from other uses of LLMs for software development, as I have been
>   repeatedly advocating is important, without much uptake.

For the record, I also strongly agree with this distinction. Sean is not
alone.

That doesn't mean I think LLM-based analysis tools are devoid of problems,
but incorporating substantial portions (substantial in terms of semantics,
not in terms of lines of mechanical changes) of LLM-generated code adds
additional risks and concerns that use of LLMs for code analysis does not.