I’m genuinely trying to understand the point of AI code review.
Once an LLM generated change gets into a few hundreds or thousands of lines, a human reviewer can barely read the whole thing in any meaningful way. And even if they can, why should they spend their time reviewing thousands of lines generated by someone else’s AI?
If the code is going to be reviewed by another AI anyway, why doesn’t the developer opening the PR just run one more iteration before submitting it? Is the assumption that after a thorough implementation pass, having a different AI review the code “some time later” will catch things the original AI somehow missed?
Or is the assumption that my precious "Code Review AI" has some superior prompt and sacred collection of skills that makes it meaningfully different from the AI the developer used to write the code?
If that’s the case, why not just give developers that reviewer AI locally and have them iterate against it before opening the PR? What’s the point? Why not just blindly merge everything and see if it breaks or not?
Comments URL: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49369710](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49369710)
Points: 1