tonkkatonka
Joined 3 years ago
Karma
345
Submissions
90
Member since
May 11
Recent submissions
Comment · 10 days ago
you should check out aviator verify. you don't even have to look at the diff, what you're reviewing with aviator is a list of acceptance criteria which then get combined with invariants (rules that are always applied in your codebase, created per repo) to check AI generated code.
Comment · 1 month ago
What evidence do we have that code review is good for spotting bugs? Because the evidence actually says the opposite - we think that code review is good for spotting bugs but what it's actually good for is knowledge sharing.
Quoting from this article: https://thenewstack.io/kill-code-review-theater/
Ask engineers why they review code, and most will say they do it to find bugs. In 2013, Alberto Bacchelli and Christian Bird studied code review at Microsoft and classified 570 review comments. 44% of developers ranked finding defects as their top reason for reviewing. Only 14% of the actual comments were about defects. Five years later, Caitlin Sadowski and her colleagues looked at nine million reviewed changes at Google and reached the same conclusion.
Comment · 1 month ago
"My working hypothesis is that human beings are too slow when dealing with code. If we're going to move at the speed of the agents, we're all going to have to back off a little bit and maintain high-level supervision."
Comment · 1 month ago
The best engineers don't want to be botsitters
Comment · 3 months ago
One approach could be the role of an automated verification engineer, a cross between a developer experience engineer and quality assurance.
Comment · 3 months ago