Emotions are running evidently high, so I assume there may be strong reactions to this iteration of the policy as well.

Personally, I find this policy to be quite fine. It's probably not perfect, but what policy is? Especially on a first iteration. We can see what works and what doesn't with practice. We have particularly bad visibility on what the future will look like regarding to coding assistance at the moment; we're all collectively figuring it out. So let's be humble about all this.

What seems obvious to me is that nothing in this policy is specific to LLMs; it only pertains to LLMs inasmuch as LLMs make it easy to disrespect its principles. It seems like a good, decently future-proof property to me.

/Arnaud

On Tue, 21 Jul 2026 at 17:16, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs <ghc-devs@haskell.org> wrote:
Friends

There has been a lot of discussion about GHC's LLM policy on this GHC thread.

I have made quite few revisions in the light of this and other conversations.  Here is the draft again, I hope in a close to final form.   Any final thoughts?

thanks

Simon
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list -- ghc-devs@haskell.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ghc-devs-leave@haskell.org


--
Arnaud Spiwack
Director, Research at https://moduscreate.com and https://tweag.io.