A lot of people in opensource projects put their heads in the sand, and didn’t want to deal with all of the stuff coming out of LLM assisted code. This is a much better idea. We were always short of hands to help build things … and shorter still of hands to review things, or to even decide what a competent gate was for a feature.
This is much more useful.
Projects and developers and maintainers using LLM to review all of the code and the original specs for the architecture to make sure it makes sense and to find things that are just flawed or half baked or “now that we have Llm is this really all you can do?”
I’m actually kind of excited to see more Llm structure in a project as a given for things like Linux, Postgres etc, things that make it possible to find problems early … further left. Actually higher standards for what constitutes code that’s pushed for a project.
This is much more useful.
Projects and developers and maintainers using LLM to review all of the code and the original specs for the architecture to make sure it makes sense and to find things that are just flawed or half baked or “now that we have Llm is this really all you can do?”
I’m actually kind of excited to see more Llm structure in a project as a given for things like Linux, Postgres etc, things that make it possible to find problems early … further left. Actually higher standards for what constitutes code that’s pushed for a project.
We need this bad in the open source world.