It should've been prominently displayed that the code in question was LLM-produced, which is why I had to explicitly ask because it wasn't mentioned. Boost should be honest and transparent and no one should be unwittingly subjected to reviewing LLM-produced code without knowing it beforehand. This is to say, Boost should have honor and integrity and we are the keepers of maintaining that honor and integrity. Transparency is part of this. The other side of the coin is that I've actually written coroutine and I/O schedulers so I understand exactly how difficult the problem is and how subtle the bugs are. It takes a lot of time to digest this stuff and produce something of high-quality. Using an LLM to take a shortcut for all of this is very anti-Boost, imo. And I'm not sure it's a precedent we want to set. What's the rush for getting this into Boost? Why not simply just incubate it and rollout to real users first? - Christian