Rust-lang/rust is adopting an LLM policy • Hacker News Board

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

#71

Post by sensanaty » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 9:03 PM UTC

incrudible wrote: post #8

seanhunter wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I think the reasons set out in TFA are interesting, which on my reading are: 1) Code is the least interesting bit in some ways - they’re trying to build not only rust but a community of experts around rust which is able to maintain and improve it in the long term and the authors of prs need to understand the code deeply and show a willingness to be part of that long run. Llm-generated code even if it looks p…

No codebase worth being deeply invested in is deeply understood by anyone, including the original authors. The eternal maintenance argument is tiresome. If there is a problem in need of fixing, you figure it out, you do not depend on some author being available, and LLMs are exceptionally helpful in this regard as well. Then, if the LLM has trouble figuring out, so will another human. It is a code smell.

I disagree. For sure there doesn't exist anyone out there who knows every detail of Rust (or any similarly complex project) because that's simply not possible, but domain expertise is a very real thing and simply invaluable to the long term success of any project.

From my own work experience, the "dinosaurs" are the most valuable people in the whole org, because oftentimes understanding the code isn't nearly sufficient to make good long term choices. You very often need to know the historical context of why certain things were made in order to not shoot blindly in the dark with random changes.

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

#72

Post by lukasco » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 1:36 AM UTC

cbarnes99 wrote: post #67

lukasco wrote: post #60

I think LLM policies which ban usage are ultimately self-defeating. They neatly switch concerns about quality of contributions to concerns about "AI slop". These two things are not the same. But the biggest problem is that they ignore the (unevenly distributed) future. The future: SWEs will no longer write code by hand. The era of hand coding is over. We only saw that for sure in the last 6 - 9 months. But it's over.…

You clearly didn't read the actual policy if you think they're banning llms.

Thanks, but I did read the policy. This is what they say: "It's fine to use LLMs to answer questions, analyze, distill, refine, check, suggest, review. But not to create."

And later:

"There are very strict guidelines on LLM-generated code changes:

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

That's a pretty limited wedge of allowed cases in my opinion.

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

#73

Post by sensanaty » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 10:16 AM UTC

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…

I wouldn't trust the majority of AI bros with a bicycle, yet alone a jet engine.

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

#74

Post by stillpointlab » Fri, Aug 07, 2026, 11:52 PM UTC

> We have long had the problem that there are more people who want to write code than people willing to review it.

I think this is an important thing to mull over. The world is going to be a different place for those who wanted to write code but not review it compared to those who are willing to carefully review code.