@mia @cwilcox808 @andreu

If you're curious, in Firefox it starts around here: https://searchfox.org/firefox-main/rev/a729ef7f53b9b53b4cb6651b16618c462c8f0674/layout/style/GeckoBindings.cpp#749

Depending on the color name and settings (effective color-scheme, forced-colors, printing, ...) it might end up in a list of hard-coded "stand-ins" list, in a user pref value, or in the OS color (NativeGetColor): https://searchfox.org/firefox-main/rev/a729ef7f53b9b53b4cb6651b16618c462c8f0674/widget/nsXPLookAndFeel.cpp#1009-1022

@hdv @jaffathecake @jcsteh @pikesley

The only real risk IMO is being overwhelmed with tons of crappy AI patches, but so far people have been reasonable with their usage.

The more common pattern I see is a coworker uploading an AI-written patch as work in progress and saying "Before wasting your time, I tried to fix X with Claude and it came up with this approach, not sure it's on the right track, can you take a look?", and that's honestly... fine? I would've asked directly but... :)

@hdv @jaffathecake @jcsteh @pikesley

FWIW as someone who reviews a lot of Firefox code (and is a bit unimpressed by AI coding), FF developers tend to disclose when they're using AI if they're not quite sure about what they're submitting.

That said, there's tons of bad human-written patches too, so the standards are pretty similar: If I don't understand the code you're sending me I'll request changes (be it "explain why this is the right approach" or "document stuff better" or...).