Generative AI and D: comparison with other language projects

[Indraj Gandham]

The author of that post did not explicitly specify the degree of 
LLM use. However, he did say:

> If the upstream devs is going to start using ai, this should be 
> preemptively segmented into a new namespace, perhaps `bracca`. 
> Rather then trying to clean up a mess later, in the event 
> copyright law suddenly declares you must back pay if you used 
> ai trained on gnu code.

I don't think this could be a problem if the LLM was being used 
only for small edits. You have assumed meanings and intentions in 
both that post and my post here. The author also clarified in his 
reply to you that he was not suggesting that LLMs should be 
banned, as you assumed.

> You are trying to make it sound like I said that we would be 
> forcing all Pv3 code into the LLM segment specifically so that 
> we can freely use LLMs on Phobos 3. This is false. The truth of 
> my statement is self-evident in it's full context and is far 
> less provocative than your framing of the quote would suggest. 
> I was describing the end-state of the users request. It was 
> *NOT* a position statement about how Phobos 3 development is to 
> be conducted.

I was not insinuating this at all. I brought it up as it suggests 
that the segmentation approach has already been rejected.

> If you are going to make an argument using my words, please 
> have the basic courtesy to include the full context. You are 
> not doing your argument any favors by cherry-picking a quotes 
> then using a deceptive framing on it to make it sound like I 
> said something far more provocative than I did. You will not 
> win debates by deceiving your audience.

It would seem that you are not particularly interested in 
debating this issue anyway:

https://forum.dlang.org/post/adajbcujigtteasbpayk@forum.dlang.org

But I suppose I shouldn't assume.