On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 2:28 PM Richard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
In article < <CAHf7xWteO7nQazqXoXBXD24ytSjNAuyVcaC=gDjWYde7X2bdtw@mail.gmail.com>> you write:
It's also worth asking, was any of this largely coded by something such as an LLM?
...and if any library, not just this one, had such content, what then?
Crappy code written by humans has been around as long as humans have been writing code. So has good code written by humans.
LLM coding agents are with us to stay. Code should be judged on it's intrinsic quality and not whether or not an LLM was used to create it.
My IDE has coding agents built into it and they constantly make suggestions for completing code, writing code, etc. I judge these contributions myself and decide whether or not to accept them. In the end, you can't really tell how much of my code is written as suggested completions or as characters I typed myself.
People have, and will continue to, use all kinds of tools to get things done. And that's fine. But one aspect that this particular case brings up, which I've previously mentioned to Vinnie, are the rights to the produced code. Is the code produced under a different license than BSL? Is such a license compatible with BSL? Does it have a license? Do you need attribution? And, not being a lawyer, I just don't know any actual answers. But I do think we need answers. PS. As for endorsement.. I can't endorse it as I no longer have enough domain knowledge to evaluate it. :-) -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supongas Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net