Post B65uT6rBCiyW5o5GYi by PuercoPop@mastodon.social
 (DIR) More posts by PuercoPop@mastodon.social
 (DIR) Post #B65uT6e3zUU1R7wn7A by PuercoPop@mastodon.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I already held Eric Raymond in the worst regard (and him calling integration tests "front-end tests" does not help). But they are now trying to upstream LLM-assisted code into #Emacs and they are upset they can't do it all in one go.> I know, but I've been systematically auditing the code for thoseusing chatGPT 5.5, which is very good at that kind of deep dive.It tells me I've covered almost everything that can be tested inbatch mode in my 42 patches.https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2026-05/msg00138.html
       
 (DIR) Post #B65uT6rBCiyW5o5GYi by PuercoPop@mastodon.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I really hope that Emacs takes a stance against LLM generated code sooner rather than later.
       
 (DIR) Post #B65uT79c6Bij0yhzI8 by tusharhero@mathstodon.xyz
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @PuercoPop recently heard that GNU is going to put on hold all AI patches. And I am sure RMS isnnto letting it get merged in Emacs (he is still personally active in devel mailing lists)
       
 (DIR) Post #B65uT7I7aYWfRMgmYK by SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @tusharhero@mathstodon.xyz @PuercoPop@mastodon.social Yeah that is the right move. The legal precedence around LLM generated code is currently still unclear.Code generated using an LLM that was trained on proprietary code might be considered a derivative work which means it might be not usable. It is safe to wait until the dust settles on this.