Re:Gentoo AI Policy
by StopDisinfo910 on Monday September 15, 2025 @11:09AM
(#45250600)
> So, after reading code, one should write down what made him amazed and find out why it is so - whether it is a custom of a project or a peculiarity of code just read.
Sorry but that’s delusional.
The amount of people actually able to meaningfully read code, somehow identify what was so incredible it should be analysed despite being unfamiliar with the code base, maintain a list of their own likely error and self review is so vanishingly low it might as well not exist.
If that’s the bare a potential new contributor has to cross, you will get exactly none.
I’m personally glade LLVM disagree with you.
>The amount of people actually able to meaningfully read code, somehow identify what was so incredible it should be analysed despite being unfamiliar with the code base, maintain a list of their own likely error and self review is so vanishingly low it might as well not exist.
LLVM, I just checked, does not have a formal list of code conventions and/or typical errors and mistakes. Could they have that list, we would not have the pleasure to discuss that. That PR we are discussing would be much more polished and there would be much less than several dozens of comments.
> If that’s the bare a potential new contributor has to cross, you will get exactly none.
So, after reading code, one should write down what made him amazed and find out why it is so - whether it is a custom of a project or a peculiarity of code just read.
I actually have such a list for my work. Do you?
No, it is not. Dozens of comments on a PR is an exceptional amount. Early contributions should be small so that one can learn typical customs and mistakes for self review before attempting a big code change.That PR we discuss here contains a maintainer's requirement to remove excessive commenting - PR's author definitely did not do a codebase style matching cleanup job on his code before submission.