>>109477883
Not new for zig also by the pic another OP posted a few hours ago rust apparently took a more varied stance on AI contributions

Don't care, I'll stay at C

>>109477916

I’m asking if we’re going to see this more and more.

We know open-source is run by real programmers, and I think the tolerance for slop is at a breaking point.

>>109477883
They are valid, but five years from now, I don't think they will have much choice.
Most rust developers are really subpar. They are terrible. I have the actual development. That's why they need rusts hand-holding in the first place. Replacing these fuckers with an artificial intelligence is a breeze.

To me it's an admittance that you don't care about engineering which is bad for an engineering related project.
These are political decisions, not technical ones.
Nobody cares who writes code, they care if the code works. And most maintainers don't even write most of the code so I don't know why they would be upset to begin with, your job already majorly consist of reading code written by other people, but somehow it's okay to take their contributions but not when its mechanical. I guess improvement isn't worth it to you and your users compared to your personal pride in humanity.
I'm being serious, this is effectively like putting a "we don't take things seriously here" sign on the front of their projects/offices. They would rather bicker, with machines, than allow them to contribute and ease the burden. Something you would think open source developers would care about considering they're underfunded and understaffed, yet here they are limiting their own options even further for no good reason. They'd rather have an unlimited stream of issues that they're solely responsible for solving even though they don't have to, stalling up progress for the entire ecosystem.

>>109477883
>>109477979
it doesn't matter

who's stopping you from making llm code, contributing it and saying yep i wrote this? nothing

the only thing they care about is not having to review slop the people who submit it don't even understand, you have to be fully aware of and confident in the technical decisions, if you are it doesn't matter if a machine wrote the code

>>109477883
rust really is the tranny language

>>109478034
>it doesn't matter and you can't tell the difference
>lets enact policy that prevents this
This implies it's not enforceable consistently which usually ends up only burning innocent people, just like with DRM.
A human submits a patch, someone accuses them of AI, there's no way to prove or disprove it. Nobody wins.

>>109477883
>nooo you have to write code the way we want you to
why are communists and transfolx so authoritatian?

>thoughts?
LUDDITES BTFO
AI CHADS WON

>>109478034
this, also no one wants/can maintain slop. ai write 10x more code than necessary, and the result is some unreadable mess. maybe if you need to ship garbage in your day job it's fine, but if we're talking decade long projects with long term support, slop won't cut it.

it's not an anti ai decision, it's just setting the bar for quality. i read rust ai guidelines and they explicitly state you're not disallowed from pushing ai generated code.

>>109477949
what makes you say that? most rust projects ive seen are very well written
tauri, zed, alacritty, wezterm, bevy, helix, niri, tree sitter, iced/iced gui apps, all come to mind

LUDDITES BTFO

>>109477883
None, thanks for asking.

>>109477883
tranny lang

I think they are right for most of the contributions, but if someone also reads the code and has a functioning brain, AI can be useful.

>>109477883
Rust is 'AI allowed if you look at the output' (in practice it just means blatant slop is allowed). Zig is the only serious language.
We need an anti-slop OS and an anti-slop browser, though, otherwise we're screwed.

>>109479809
Nobody who has a functioning brain gets any productivity out of gay eye. Maybe 10 years from now that will be the case and by all means, policies should be revisited then. But that simply isn't the current reality.

good

>>109478034
the fact that people can immediately identify slop generated code the same way they can immediately identify slop generated art

>>109477979
>these are political decisions, not technical ones.
no, they are definitely technical decisions because developers are getting completely overwhelmed with dogshit pull requests eating up their time and the code they’re getting doesn’t meet minimum quality standards and the brown proompter who one shot it didn’t even bother to read it or understand how it works.

AI labs will simply fork Rust and keep developing it. Snailcats can have their toy for all they care. You can't stop progress.

>>109480295
>developers are getting completely overwhelmed with dogshit pull requests eating up their time
This is a combination of observation bias and neglecting the current state.
We already have the problem of people submitting bad PRs. Even if the volume is greater now you're neglecting to acknowledge the increase in accepted patches while acknowledging the increase in rejected patches.

>>109480321
BASED
LUDDITES BTFO'D BY ALMIGHTY AI CHAD
...AGAIN!

File: master-race.png (116 KB, 1280x720)

116 KB PNG

LUDDITES ARE WEAK
AI IS STRONG
THEREFORE
KNEEL, WEAKLINGS, KNEEL BEFORE MIGHTY AI MASTER RACE

>>109477883
Based. The slop must stop

>>109477979
No, it is an engineering decision.
LLMs spit out garbage, unmaintainable, and frequently outright incorrect code, and they create PRs at a rate that is difficult to process, while drowning out actual quality contributions

>>109481584
>sometimes the tools are ineffective, especially the older ones, so we should blanket ban them since I don't think anyone could use them effectively
No.

>>109480014
Java (openjdk specifically) also has a kind of anti-AI policy. But the circle of people who can contribute to Java and JVM development is extremely limited and difficult to get into.

>>109481626
>some people survive getting shot in the foot, so we should all continue shooting ourselves
All that applies to even the newest, cutting edge LLMs. It's slop all the way down

>>109481724
That argument isn't as convincing as you may have thought.
Most people understand the merits and utilities of a firearm even if you could decide to shoot your foot with it.

>>109481626
I'm a different anon, but the massive influx of AI-generated pull requests means that as a project maintainer, you're forced to:
1) completely abandon reviewing these pull requests and merge everything without looking at them (rarely seen)
2) do reviews and merges entirely using AI, without even looking at the pull requests (like OpenClaw which is unmaintaiable piece of shit after 8 month of development and already completely forgotten)
3) be forced to limit AI usage and start banning people, sometimes unfairly

A lot depends on the project itself and the community. I work in the JVM tech stack, and there are many jvm projects where AI use is fully permitted or encouraged. But there's simply no massive influx of pull requests, as the projects themselves are quite mature, typically used in enterprise environments, boring, not cool. There's no hype.

At the same time, projects in Rust, Typescript, and Python attract a huge number of vibecoders, and nothing can be done about it. The same situation applies to open-source game engines.

So, unfortunately, we can only hope that after a while, vibecoders will get bored and move on to other things, leaving open source behind forever.

>>109481736
Some firearms are good and useful, just like some tooling is good and useful
And then there are Sig P320 and LLMs respectively

>>109477979
>Nobody cares who writes code, they care if the code works.
Programmers need to accept that these are NOT mutually exclusive for the foreseeable future as long as the automated entity is LLMeme based.

Bernie hates AI so they banned it. Too bad because Rust is great to vibecode in.
Dumb trannies.