[JoshTriplett]

> This sounds limiting.

Coding guidelines generally are, by design.

> * if you want to generate any doc use our llms_doc_writing.txt

That's exactly what the project is providing here. The guidelines for how to use LLMs for this project are "don't".

You say "generally better to", but that depends on what you're trying to achieve. Your suggestion is better if you want to change how people use LLMs, the project's is better if the project is trying to change whether people use LLMs.

[willahmad]

This is not a guideline on the code itself, its about tools you use to produce that code.

You can similarly ban code written using IntelliJ IDEA and accept only code written using vim or VS Code, but you wouldn't even know if it was written in IDEA or VSCode.

Saner guideline would be:

    * before submitting your LLM generated code, review your code
    * respect yours and our time
    * if LLM spit out 1k line of code, its on you to split it and make it manageable for us to review, because humans review this code
    * if we find that you used LLM but wasn't respectful to our community by not following above, please f.... off from our community, and we will ban you
    * submitting PR using solely automated PR slop generators will be banned forever

[JoshTriplett]

That sure is a different thing that some people might prefer. It it not what this project prefers, and that's fine.

To give another example of what is impossible to perfectly detect but still reasonable to prohibit: most projects have a (written or unwritten) requirement of "don't copy code from other projects without respecting their license". There's no reliable way to perfectly detect that someone copied a pile of code from one of their company's proprietary projects, or from some Open Source project under a different license or without attribution. But it's still reasonable for projects to prohibit such "contributions".