Ask HN: Does a human still review your code?

sstikit about 4 hours ago 6 comments

DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.

Most of the code I work on is for internal company use at a small company and for personal projects. After experiencing painful code review processes where code was rewritten several times for what many times felt like arbitrary reasons to fit someone’s idea of a best practice, I am now on a team where code review is largely automated. I find Claude’s /review and /code-review are invaluable and do a more thorough code review than any human . For those of you who use AI to write the majority of your code, do you still have a human in the loop to do more than spot checks ?

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 274 words in the discussion.

Discussion (6 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

shaftway•about 2 hours ago

Both. AI code review is built-in, but there's always a second human in the loop.

I'm concerned that there are people pushing on the code generation front, the code reviewing front, and the laziness front. Eventually they're going to all meet in the middle, and there will be a significant number of engineers who are using AI to write and review the code, rubber stamp it, and push it into prod, with disasterous results.

spottedmarley•about 4 hours ago

No code review here. I tried to make it a regular part of my work flow but, it didn't last. That being said, I'm a retired developer and everything I build are personal projects so the stakes are lower than for working developers. I retired just a year or two before AI coding agents came into existence so I never experienced using these tools in an actual workplace setting. Working must have a whole different vibe these days

ryanchants•about 3 hours ago

Increasingly not. We use CodeRabbit at work, which catches good stuff. And I have my own gauntlet that I run code through.

https://github.com/jacquardlabs/gauntlet

sagabai•about 4 hours ago

I wonder how codebases for important products (not demos or short-living ones) end up without anyone reviewing the code. Some claim engineers should become more of "architects" and "designers", but not coders/reviewers anymore. Wish to hear people's stories, if much documentation and reviewing from the high-level only is enough to keep the project from becoming a failure

stikit•about 3 hours ago

If someone’s best practice,optimization or security check is that important, automate it. Automation is more scalable and consistent . It would make more sense to me to build purpose built agents to look for any patterns that matter. Yes, humans are needed to sanity check and design the agents and rules. Combine that with a well designed build and test harness , human code review seems to me to be obsolete.

davedx•about 4 hours ago

Nope. I occasionally do human review of my own code and very occasionally of other peoples', but for the most part it's all 100% automated. I use Codex's Github code review integration and it does a pretty decent job of spotting P1's and P2's.