Hi Am 2026-01-22 16:54, schrieb Derick Rethans:
I read in the linked PR:"Team work with Claude Code opus 4.5 💪" This makes me instantly want to vote no to this.
What is being voted on as part of an RFC is the “concept”, not the specific implementation. Having an implementation available is often helpful to evaluate the feasibility of a concept and to figure out edge cases, but it is possible and regularly happens that the implementation changes quite a bit as part of the code review of the implementation. In fact for my own RFCs, I often have a fairly sloppy “PoC” implementation that I spend the time to clean up if / when I'm reasonably confident that the RFC will pass to avoid doing needless work.
Or in this specific instance if the use of AI-assistance in the code is considered a problem, it would be possible for someone who is more familiar with the engine than Nicolas to do a “clean room” implementation based on the semantics outlined in the RFC.
The RFC text should be judged on its own merit and should stand on its own, such that any “sufficiently capable” developer would be able to create the implementation - incl. all possible edge cases - based on the specification in the RFC text alone.
Best regards Tim Düsterhus
