3 ms·
I have devs that do this and we have CI AI code review. Problem is, it always finds something. So the devs that have been in the code base for a while know what
by osn9363739 10mo ago
I have devs that do this and we have CI AI code review. Problem is, it always finds something. So the devs that have been in the code base for a while know what to ignore, the new devs get bogged down by research. It's a net benefit as it forces them to learn, which they should be doing. It def slows them down though which goes against some of what I see about the productivity boost claims. A human reviewer with the codebase experience is still needed.
- mywittyname 10mo agoSlowing down new developers by forcing them to understand the product and context better is a good thing. I do agree that the tool we use (code rabbit) is a little too nitpicky, but it's right way more than it's wrong.
- bee_rider 10mo agoI don’t use any of these sorts of tools, so sorry for the naive questions… What sort of thing does it find? Bad smells (possibly known imperfections but least-bad-picks), bugs (maybe triaged), or violations of the coding guides (maybe known and waivered)? I wonder if there’s a need for something like a RAG of known issues…
- baq 10mo agoGPT 5+ high+ review bots find consistently good issues on average for me, sometimes they’re bogus, but sometimes they’re really, really good finds. I was impressed more than once.
- filoeleven 10mo agoThis response fails entirely to answer the question.