2 ms·

I’m wondering if code review is the right place to give advice; it seems like the process is meant for human reviews (Where there is latency) and pair programmi

I’m wondering if code review is the right place to give advice; it seems like the process is meant for human reviews (Where there is latency) and pair programming might be a better metaphor for what AI should be doing? Earlier feedback is often better. We sort of have that with errors and warnings, where an IDE’s UI collects them into a todo list. The trouble is, the list isn’t necessarily prioritized very well. On the other hand, asking for a review whenever you like is easy to control, versus being interrupted. With all the AI tools floating around, it seems like user testimonials are going to be important for learning what’s worth trying out.

Jet_Xu 2y ago
Interesting perspective on the timing of feedback. We chose PR reviews because they're a natural integration point where developers already expect feedback, and it's when context is most complete. However, we're exploring ways to provide earlier feedback without being intrusive. The key is finding the right balance between immediate assistance and allowing developers to maintain their flow. Would love to hear more about your experiences with different feedback timing approaches.