Reviewing code you didn't write
Posted by colescodes 2 days ago
Comments
Comment by springtimesun 2 days ago
I liked the article because what I struggle a little bit with is where to start (even though I wrote the ticket before I pointed the agent at it and often stay in the sessions to supervise and direct). There’s something that just feels bewildering about code I didn’t write.
One thing reviewing does make me more disciplined about is making the agent write small diffs and descriptive commit check points. Probably the default for many of you who work on teams, but something I didn’t really follow when I had the entire code context and changes in my head.
I have been making use of git-absorb. Leaving a really tidy git history is satisfying.
Comment by colescodes 2 hours ago
What surprised me is that writing the ticket myself didn't help much. The agent satisfies it in ways I wouldn't have picked, so I'm still rebuilding.
git-absorb is new to me, thanks.
Comment by colescodes 2 days ago
Comment by jr3592 2 days ago
Comment by BetterThanSober 1 day ago
Good luck asking AI on "why use X, why X and not Y", yes they will answer but it is based on their current, ad-hoc deductions, not their past reasoning
I guess the same can be said for legacy code base where the original author had left years ago and currently running a kebab shop in Dagestan but my point still remains
Comment by colescodes 2 hours ago
Commits, has a PR thread, maybe a ticket. There's something to dig into, and an agent is decent at excavating it.
Ask the agent why X and not Y about its own code and you get a fresh answer made up on the spot with no connection to what happened when it was written.
Comment by colescodes 2 hours ago