On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 7:12 PM David Edelsohn via Gcc <[email protected]> wrote: > > The GCC Steering Committee has accepted the recommended policy of the GCC > AI Policy Working Group. The policy is described in the following document > preview / pull request in Forge, which will be committed to the GCC website: > > https://forge.sourceware.org/redi/gcc-wwwdocs/commit/4d0793a6a14bf9bfe9e92ac1599840780355199d > > We expect the policy to continue to evolve and will revisit it periodically. > > We wish to thank Jonathan Wakely for his leadership of the working group > and the members of the working group: Carlos O'Donell, Sudakshina Das, Jason > Merrill, Joel Sherrill, Sam James, Robin Dapp, and Arthur Cohen.
I would like to thank all of those involved in getting this policy in place. I would like to suggest/propose an amendment to the policy. First some background: LLVM has the following policy (https://llvm.org/docs/AIToolPolicy.html): ``` AI tools must not be used to fix GitHub issues labelled good first issue. These issues are generally not urgent, and are intended to be learning opportunities for new contributors to get familiar with the codebase. Whether you are a newcomer or not, fully automating the process of fixing this issue squanders the learning opportunity and doesn’t add much value to the project. Using AI tools to fix issues labelled as “good first issues” is forbidden. ``` We should have a similar addition to our AI policy. Most of the changes to match.pd with respect to "easy hack" have been less than 15 lines and will be "squanders the learning opportunity" [of others]. Note the LLVM policy even allows to mark the pull request as extractive and even bring up the issues to the CoC about this. Examples: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+label%3Aextractive+ Also see https://llvm.org/docs/AIToolPolicy.html#extractive-contributions which expands on some parts here. Thanks, Andrea > > Happy Hacking! > David
