you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 6 hours ago* (2 children)

Yeah. Pretty much.

The actual policy is that it all gets reviewed by a human I think when I was looking into it.

The bots are likely most useful to reject obviously bad patches which have obvious bugs or don't follow guidelines. And identifying bad code is something which AI tends to be good at.

In our code at work, we use weakly typed languages which aren't strict and on those it tends to be even better. We catch things like table keys that are typed wrong, etc. On C, things like pointers it probably does a good job with identifying as wrong

If it passes AI code review it still gets checked by human for things that are wrong and needs fixing. But if it fails, it probably needs fixing regardless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    A good language server / ide will also complain about incorrect types. That specific example is a deterministic process, no llm is required for it at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 5 hours ago*

    We do use one. But, in practice, they can't catch a lot of things which AI will

    At least in our case too based on what's available, it also can't check stuff like coding style well (but our development relies on that less).

    Some might though

  • source
  • parent