Good question!

All the code, architecture, logic, and design in minikv were written by me, 100% by hand. I did use AI tools only for a small part of the documentation—specifically the README, LEARNING.md, and RAM_COMMUNITY.md files—to help structure the content and improve clarity.

But for all the source code (Rust), tests, and implementation, I wrote everything myself, reviewing and designing every part.

Let me know if you want details or want to look at a specific part of the code!

▲

the-lazy-guy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

https://github.com/whispem/minikv/blob/main/src/coordinator/...

Nice, you are the first person I have seen who cares to type in unicode arrow instead of "->" in comments.

▲

4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

whispem 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Haha, thanks!

I like the clarity of the real arrow—it just makes flows in comments more readable for me.

Glad to see someone noticed!

▲

the-lazy-guy 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Ok, let me call you out more explicitly. It is clear that most of the code is not written by you. Commit history shows that first a large feature appears out of the blue, then you have a followup series of commits removing "useless" comments (left by LLM). Quite a few useless comments are still there.

Also your rust implementation is 100% broken which some of comments you deleted point out.

I also love this comment: https://github.com/whispem/minikv/blob/main/src/coordinator/... It is exactly what LLMs write when you ask them to implement something.

	▲	whispem 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for your detailed feedback. Just to clarify: none of the Rust code, architecture, or logic in minikv was generated by AI. Every line of code was written by me personally, without copying or pasting from LLMs or any automated tools. The only places where I used AI were a few documentation files (README, LEARNING.md, RAM_COMMUNITY.md)—never for implementation. Regarding the commit history: I tend to work locally for a while, then push larger changes once they’re solid, so it can look like big features “appear out of nowhere.” Sorry if that makes the process look less transparent. As for the code being “100% broken”—if that were the case, minikv wouldn’t run at all! In reality, it starts up, forms clusters, and passes its integration tests. Of course, like any open source project, there are bound to be some bugs or things to improve. If you’ve found specific places where it actually breaks or if there are unclear comments left, I’d genuinely appreciate a bug report or concrete example. That’s the fastest way for me to make the project better. Thanks again for taking the time to look so closely at the repo. I’m always open to fair critique and technical suggestions!

▲

orphea 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

For the sake of fairness, a lot of people do care to type or copy-and-paste unicode.

	▲	whispem 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks!

▲

cannonpalms 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You left behind a script clearly written by your LLM tool that patched some problems in your code. It's undeniable.

I'm all for using the tools available, but I don't understand lying about it.

https://github.com/whispem/minikv/blob/main/fix_ci_complete....

▲

whispem 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Thanks for pointing it out.

The “fix_ci_complete…” script was written (by me) to patch some CI integration issues—if the style looks generic, it’s probably because it’s a standard shell script pattern. I haven’t used LLMs to write or patch any code in minikv; any fix or automation was written and debugged manually.

If there’s something specific in the script that seems suspect, I’m happy to explain or walk through it line by line.

Again, all implementation code in minikv is mine, and I’m always open to reviewing anything that looks unclear—transparency is important to me.

	▲	suhputt 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

whispem 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This script was actually written manually to automate some repeated local fixes—mainly to speed up my workflow and make sure patches were applied consistently (and safely, with backups).

The colorful output and detailed logging are just for clarity and UX; I tend to over-comment my scripts out of habit—no AI tools were involved here (nor elsewhere in the code).

But I get why it might look generic—happy to explain any section line by line if you want!