[deleted]
There is an AI code review bubble
31–40 of 265 posts
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#32None of these tools perform particularly well and all lack context to actually provide a meaningful review beyond what a linter would find, IMO. The SOTA isn't capable of using a code diff as a jumping off point. Also the system prompts for some of them are kinda funny in a hopelessly naive aspirational way. We should all aspire to live and breathe the code review system prompt on a daily basis.
I agree that none perform _super_ well. I would argue they go far beyond linters now, which was perhaps not true even nine months ago. To the degree you consider this to be evidence, in the last 7 days, the authors of a PR has replied to a Greptile comment with "great catch", "good catch", etc. 9,078 times.
That sounds more like confirmation that greptile is being included in a lot agentic coding loops than anything
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#33Claude code's code review is _sufficient_ imo.
still need HITL, but the human is shifted right and can do other things rather than grinding through fiddly details.
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#34None of these tools perform particularly well and all lack context to actually provide a meaningful review beyond what a linter would find, IMO. The SOTA isn't capable of using a code diff as a jumping off point. Also the system prompts for some of them are kinda funny in a hopelessly naive aspirational way. We should all aspire to live and breathe the code review system prompt on a daily basis.
I agree that none perform _super_ well. I would argue they go far beyond linters now, which was perhaps not true even nine months ago. To the degree you consider this to be evidence, in the last 7 days, the authors of a PR has replied to a Greptile comment with "great catch", "good catch", etc. 9,078 times.
> To the degree you consider this to be evidence, in the last 7 days, the authors of a PR has replied to a Greptile comment with "great catch", "good catch", etc. 9,078 times.
do you have a bot to do this too?
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#35> Unfortunately, code review performance is ephemeral and subjective
> Today's agents are better than the median human code reviewer
Which is it? You cannot have it both ways.
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that none perform _super_ well. I would argue they go far beyond linters now, which was perhaps not true even nine months ago. To the degree you consider this to be evidence, in the last 7 days, the authors of a PR has replied to a Greptile comment with "great catch", "good catch", etc. 9,078 times.
Not trying to sidetrack, but a figure like that is data, not evidence. At the very minimum you need context which allows for interpretation; 9,078 positive author comments would be less impressive if Greptile made 1,000,000 comments in that time period, for example.
over 7 days does contextualize it some, though.
9,078 comments / 7 (days) / 8 (hours) = 162.107 though, so if human that person is making 162 comments an hour, 8 hours a day, 7 days a week?
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#37So far I've been pretty happy with Greptile. Tried Copilot and Cubic.dev but landed on Greptile
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#38None of these tools perform particularly well and all lack context to actually provide a meaningful review beyond what a linter would find, IMO. The SOTA isn't capable of using a code diff as a jumping off point. Also the system prompts for some of them are kinda funny in a hopelessly naive aspirational way. We should all aspire to live and breathe the code review system prompt on a daily basis.
In some code that I was working on, I had // stuff obj.setSomeData(something); // fifteen lines of other code obj.setSomeData(something); // more stuff The 'something' was a little bit more complex, but it was the same something with slightly different formatting. My linter didn't catch the repeat call. When asking the AI chat for a review of the code changes it did correctly flag that there was a repeat call. It als…
I'd say I see one anecdote, nothing to draw conclusions from.
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#39My company just finished a several week review period of Greptile. Devs were split over the usefulness of the tool (compared to our current solution, Cursor). While Greptile did occasionally offer better insights than Cursor, it also exhibited strange behavior such as entirely overwriting PR descriptions with its own text and occasionally arguing with itself in the comments. In the end we decided to NOT purchase Greptile as there were enough "not quite there" issues that made it more trouble than worthwhile. I am certain, though, that the Greptile team will resolve all those problems and I wish them the best of luck!
Re: There is an AI code review bubble
#40None of these tools perform particularly well and all lack context to actually provide a meaningful review beyond what a linter would find, IMO. The SOTA isn't capable of using a code diff as a jumping off point. Also the system prompts for some of them are kinda funny in a hopelessly naive aspirational way. We should all aspire to live and breathe the code review system prompt on a daily basis.
I agree that none perform _super_ well. I would argue they go far beyond linters now, which was perhaps not true even nine months ago. To the degree you consider this to be evidence, in the last 7 days, the authors of a PR has replied to a Greptile comment with "great catch", "good catch", etc. 9,078 times.
People more often say that to save face by implying the issue you identified would be reasonable for the author to miss because it's subtle or tricky or whatever. It's often a proxy for embarrassment