Filed a compiler bug related to dwarf tables that screws up debugging and line of code coverage that they completely ignored, just because I mentioned that I had every LLM check it to confirm it's a bug, since all I know is what kcov and every coverage tool generates incorrect coverage data for my repo, for 100% certain.
If they really insist on no LLM involvement at all then they're going to fall behind and lose out. Your LLM use case seems really very conservative - you didn't write any code with it, you just use it to confirm the bug. There are many OSS projects that are also taking a similar hardline against LLMs - people are going to fork them and then move on. I've had LLMs fix bugs/add features to a couple of projects like this and, well, they're missing out on the fixes/added features that I'm using locally.
How do you evaluate this? Have you tried looking for a job? Or compared your project with a similar project where people are using AI and you are not? Or you’re just staying put and waiting to see what happens?
jabedude · · focus · HN ↗
abc42 · · focus · HN ↗
onlyrealcuzzo · · focus · HN ↗
UncleOxidant · · focus · HN ↗
0c3ca83 · · focus · HN ↗
brabel · · focus · HN ↗