Re: Common Lisp with no AI (that's ironic I suppose)

They're not, though. No study at all is showing any such thing.

What they are doing is burning down our planet for more capitalist 
exploitation, and as such must be opposed on principle.

On 27/02/2026 09.15, Scott L. Burson wrote:
> Hi Brett,
>
> You're seriously suggesting you would stop using SBCL if it contained 
> any LLM-generated code whatsoever, no matter how thoroughly tested and 
> painstakingly reviewed?  I think that's silly.  Everyone here knows 
> that LLMs can screw up, just like us humans, and that all submissions 
> need to be thoroughly vetted.  Though I'm not on the SBCL team, I have 
> complete confidence that everything they accept into the code base 
> will be of the highest possible quality.  That's how they've done 
> things for 20+ years, and there's no reason it would change now.
>
> Two things are happening rapidly: LLMs are getting better at 
> programming, and people are learning how to get better work out of 
> them.  The attitude you are taking has been defensible until very 
> recently, but I think it no longer is, or won't be for long.
>
> -- Scott
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 9:18 PM Brett Mahar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>     Hi SBCL,
>
>     As someone just getting back into using Lisp I find it a bit sad
>     to see the AI "slop" or whatever you would like to call it
>     apparently being accepted. I don't contribute any code so its not
>     up to me but I can vote with my feet, any suggestion of Lisp
>     implementation that has a zero-tolerance policy?
>
>     Not trying to troll just seeking inside information, anyone know
>     how Carnegie Mellon's version is holding out?
>
>     One thing that I think has been overlooked in the recent "should
>     AI be allowed?" thread was: how about the copyright? How can the
>     "author" grant copyright when they did not write the code? I'm not
>     a lawyer but from what I understand the answer is "they can't" and
>     Microsoft or Google or whoever can issue an injunction at any
>     moment, or 10 years down the track when 5000 more commits have
>     been done on top of the work of various agents and humans.
>
>     I suppose for the professional programmers there is an attraction
>     to using AI in terms of creating a digital footprint of work done
>     "collaboratively" but I also suppose a lot of people will stop
>     using SBCL  ̄\\_(ツ)_/ ̄ . I have seen a few fediverse posts and
>     blog posts to that effect, one person saying they are so
>     disheartened they are considering taking all the Common Lisp repos
>     down.
>
>     Cheers,
>     Brett.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Sbcl-devel mailing list
>     [email protected]
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbcl-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel

_______________________________________________
Sbcl-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel