3 ms·

I understand your skepticism and discomfort, and also agree that an LLM should not replace a human code reviewer. I would encourage you to try one (nearly all

I understand your skepticism and discomfort, and also agree that an LLM should not replace a human code reviewer. I would encourage you to try one (nearly all including ours have a free trial). When done right, they serve as a solid first pass and surface things that warrant a second look. Repeated code where there should be an abstraction, inconsistent patterns from other similar code elsewhere in the codebase, etc. Things that linters can’t do. Would you not want your coworkers to have AI look at their PRs, have them address the relevant comments, and then pass it to you for review?

smallpipe 2y ago
> Would you not want your coworkers to have AI look at their PRs, have them address the relevant comments God no. Review is where I teach more junior people about the code base. And where I learn from the more senior people. Either of us spending time making the AI happy just to be told we’re solving the wrong problem is a ridiculous waste of time.
hsbauauvhabzb 2y ago
No, just like I don’t want coworkers using LLMs to generate code. LLMs have their uses, producing quality code is not one of them, they generate cancerous outcomes.