Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

blog.rust-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 74 posts

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#11

Post by ares623 »

socalgal2 wrote: post #7
andsoitis wrote: post #2

In a nutshell: It's fine to use LLMs to answer questions, analyze, distill, refine, check, suggest, review. But not to create.

Sounds like the beginning of the end of rust to me AI is a jet engine - Banning is for creation is like saying "we require you to go by ship/car/propeller-plane" Yes, a policy that says AI slop PRs will not be tolerated. But I've had AI track down real hard to find bugs in several projects and provide correct fixes. I've also had AI build new features and new products. The project that ignores this acceleration will…

you're free to fork and improve it with your favorite harness. Go get 'em tiger.

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#13

Post by imtringued »

socalgal2 wrote: post #7
andsoitis wrote: post #2

In a nutshell: It's fine to use LLMs to answer questions, analyze, distill, refine, check, suggest, review. But not to create.

Sounds like the beginning of the end of rust to me AI is a jet engine - Banning is for creation is like saying "we require you to go by ship/car/propeller-plane" Yes, a policy that says AI slop PRs will not be tolerated. But I've had AI track down real hard to find bugs in several projects and provide correct fixes. I've also had AI build new features and new products. The project that ignores this acceleration will…

Why does a language need higher developer velocity? Why is acceleration needed?

Acceleration makes sense for end user applications, where you're allowed to break whatever you see fit, but I don't see how it helps with core infrastructure like a programming language, where every mistake is multiplied a million fold.

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#14

Post by imtringued »

feverzsj wrote: post #6
minimaxir wrote: post #3

> Harassment is not allowed . You may not harass people for using an LLM, regardless of whether or not their use is banned by the policy. You must follow the Code of Conduct at all times when interacting with the Rust project. This policy I like.

You know rustaceans hate anything LLM when mods have to make this a rule.

If you look at the Codeberg community, you'll find that this rule makes sense. The anti AI community is pretty toxic, probably more toxic than people throwing AI slop at reviewers.

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#15

Post by matheusmoreira »

The exact rules on LLM generated code submission live here:

https://forge.rust-lang.org/policies/llm-usage.html

https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/llm-guidance/writing.h...

> Pre-arranged, non-critical, high-quality, well-tested, and well-reviewed code changes that are originally created by an LLM are allowed, with disclosure.

They clearly put a lot of thought into this and it shows. Huge respect.

> New contributors cannot create a PR using an LLM unless they first talk with a reviewer.

New contributors do not have community connections. I don't know any rust-lang/rust reviewer.

What is the correct procedure for this?

> Harassment is not allowed.

> You may not harass people for using an LLM, regardless of whether or not their use is banned by the policy.

Refreshing take. Not a fan of heavy handed moderation, but I'm still very happy to see that they have this stance given the racism-tier insults I've gotten on forums without it.

I especially like this rule:

> Don’t try to be the police for whether someone has used an LLM. You are not required to “actively look” for whether an LLM was involved.

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#17

Post by pas »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #15

The exact rules on LLM generated code submission live here: https://forge.rust-lang.org/policies/llm-usage.html https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/llm-guidance/writing.h... > Pre-arranged, non-critical, high-quality, well-tested, and well-reviewed code changes that are originally created by an LLM are allowed, with disclosure. They clearly put a lot of thought into this and it shows. Huge respect. > New contributo…

> What is the correct procedure for this?

in general to work on something that will get "into the rust compiler" it needs at least an RFC and then a Major Change Proposal [0]

in practice it starts with asking on zulip [1]

[0] https://forge.rust-lang.org/compiler/proposals-and-stabiliza...

[1] https://forge.rust-lang.org/how-to-start-contributing.html

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#18

Post by duskdozer »

andsoitis wrote: post #2

In a nutshell: It's fine to use LLMs to answer questions, analyze, distill, refine, check, suggest, review. But not to create.

Creation is still allowed:

>Pre-arranged, non-critical, high-quality, well-tested, and well-reviewed code changes that are originally created by an LLM are allowed, with disclosure.

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#19

Post by duskdozer »

piokoch wrote: post #16

The question is: is such policy even enforceable? If someone is "clever" enough to drop em-dashes and some bold highlights how one would know if something is AI generated or not?

> Some parts of the policy are unenforceable. This is not a bug. The goal is not to catch every violation, but to create a clear bright-line rule: Disclosure is required for all public LLM text, unless specifically exempted by the policy. This allows moderators to identify violations based on actions, not on intent, and only consider intent when deciding how to respond.

Re: Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy

#20

Post by Cthulhu_ »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #15

The exact rules on LLM generated code submission live here: https://forge.rust-lang.org/policies/llm-usage.html https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/llm-guidance/writing.h... > Pre-arranged, non-critical, high-quality, well-tested, and well-reviewed code changes that are originally created by an LLM are allowed, with disclosure. They clearly put a lot of thought into this and it shows. Huge respect. > New contributo…

> What is the correct procedure for this?

Get involved with the project before submitting PRs, participate in discussions, etc. But if it's a change you want to contribute, don't use an LLM to write it.

Post reply on HN