Re: GCC LLM policy adopted

Hi

On Thu, 2026-07-30 at 10:45 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> 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=
.

I don't think there is much difference:

A thorough review with potentially concrete, actionable suggestions can
easily have as much influence on the final changes as the initial
change revision. The final change that gets merged is as much derived
from the initial patch as from the review comments. Or in some cases
the review is even the majority of the contribution.

One can also extend this to detailed bug reports where the bug report
more or less says which exact lines need to be changed in what way.

Ansgar