AI contributions

[José Matos]

On Wed, 2026-05-06 at 15:38 -0400, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> Hi, Pavel,
> 
> I am broadly in agreement with your analysis. Practically speaking, if 
> existing developers want to use AI to help them fix bugs, then I have no 
> problem with it. I trust all of us to review the code the same way we 
> usually would. It probably wouldn't hurt to have a +1 sort of policy, 
> the way we do just before releases, just to guarantee an additional 
> level of review in such cases, at least at first. It also wouldn't hurt 
> for people to post things, along with the patches, similar to what you 
> did. But I'm not sure we need to require that.

I am in strong agreement with both Pavel and Riki.

> Code submissions from unknown external people are a different matter. I 
> don't see a need to rule these out entirely, but they would need careful 
> review. But that's already true for contributions from such people. 
> Maybe review that is a bit more careful would be good.
> 
> It's pretty freaking impressive what Claude did. I recently got sent a 
> paper by a colleague in which he used AI to help him prove a central 
> lemma. His view was that he could have done it himself, but he was a bit 
> rusty on certain things, and so AI made it much easier.
> 
> Riki

I also have this feeling. Yesterday I had an issue related with lambda
(anonymous functions) capture in Python. For what is worth this also applies to
C++ functions.

Claude identified the issue and clearly stated the problem and suggested a
simple solution.

It is not so much that I could not do it but it would take a longer time to fix
something that was tangent to the problem that I was trying to solve.

My only issue with those tools is the absence, by default, of any emoticons.

:-D

Best regards,
-- 
José Abílio