Programming

26291 readers

617 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

UlrikHD@programming.dev

bugsmith@programming.dev

Spyro@programming.dev

Can I use AI for the code review? (discuss.online)

submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by Lembot_0004@discuss.online to c/programming@programming.dev

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've finished a small project that is rather non-standard for me: it has just a few hundred lines of logic written by me, and most of the code is rather banal functions I picked up from the different articles and doc sheets (you know, those functions that are quite "atomic" like "check if the process is running" or "get the process name by pid by reading /proc dir" or "get a mount point by a filename")

The code was written in a "ok, let's experiment if I can do this" approach, so now it is in a complete mess.

So the question is if is there some AI that can do an initial code review for me? I've tried GhatGPT, but it was completely banal and useless.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] hallettj@leminal.space 1 points 7 months ago

My work is using Coderabbit, and I've found its feedback to be pretty helpful - especially since I'm working with a language I don't have a whole lot of experience with (Python). I check what it tells me, but it has taught me some new things. I still want human reviews as well, but the AI can pick up on detail that is easy to skim over.

It doesn't cover bigger picture stuff like maintainability, architecture, test coverage. Recently I reviewed a PR that was likely AI generated; I saw a number of cases where logic duplication invited future bugs. (Stuff like duplicating access predicates across CRUD handlers for the same resource, repeating the same validation logic in multiple places.) Also magic strings instead of enums, tests of dubious value. Coderabbit did not comment on those issues.

I'm also getting feedback from Sonarqube on the same project, which I think is static analysis. It's much less helpful. It has less to say, and a lot of that is pointing out security issues in test code.