othmanosx

AI is very good at writing a ton of overly complex code so the you gotta babysit it sometimes to get a lean code.

On the other hand, reviewing the code needs a better surface. It’s still the hard part, but what kills me is that GitHub is still expecting us to review PRs the same way, and it’s increasingly stressful due to GitHub’s poor support for a good PR review experience, I ended up building my own solution (https://pyor.review) to make reviewing the code a lot less tedious and closer to how I want to look at code.

One of the features that actually makes me read less code confidently is that it highlights the moved code, so in a large refactor PR, i can skip reviewing the parts of the code that just moved without change, it also takes AI-assisted review differently as it groups files depending on importance and flags noise, so it’s not adding more walls of text for me to read.

I found this to be the only way to move faster.

when it comes to reading the diffs, I created my own app to review the diffs away from github, manage my PRs and do everything I could on github without relying on it's broken UI https://pyor.review

You could also just ask Claude to help you go through stuff bit by bit, you'll slowly build the skill and adapt to reading Claudish.

The only way to scale reviews is by using AI to skip rather than add more walls of text

An alternative to GitHub for code review that focuses on making the human PR review experience easier and faster.

the first iPhone was years ahead of its time, but the first Apple foldable is arguably the exact same (if not inferior) to the competition, with the exception of the good user experience we're used to from Apple

I also do this with my swarm of review agents, asking them to review the code without context, that way, they produce more high-quality feedback that is backed by self-sourcing the context from the codebase instead of relying on the AI-provided PR description that might justify a code change that others might disagree with otherwise. it works well especially with code changes that could miss other parts of the codebase during refactoring or implementing features that touch multiple domains.

I agree that the workflow is broken, but only on the reviewing side, AI is a tool we use to make products just like any other we used in the past, punch cards, machine code, assembly, ...etc. AI is just the new tool that sits on top of the code as the next level, no one codes with punch cards, no one writes machine code anymore, we used to write the compiled language and don't care about how it's compiled or turned into machine code, same with AI, although it's not there yet and still requires babysitting by engineers, but that's our new job now, and we need to learn how to use it and make our lifes easier.

It’s not an editor in that sense but a tool optimized for reviewing PRs produced by AI.

the not so good part about such migrations is that the resulting PR is huge, it does contain some important parts but most of it was noise and prop renames and mechanical changes. the problem is that Github wasn't really helpful with the review proccess, it doesn't provide a good experience for reviewing large PRs (it would sometimes just crash) so it got very stressful to review and keep track of the feedback comments from my teammates and followups

later after that, I gathered the pain points we faced during our review proccess and built a platform optimized for reviewing AI PRs (https://pyor.review). firstly it's a web app and has a desktop app, so it's way more performant when reviewing large PRs, it also include a comment inbox to keep track of feedback, has grouping mechanism so reviewing migration PRs becomes a ton less stressful compared to github, surfacing important files first to review then grouping the noise for easy quick skimming, and it makes use of caching so the content loads faster. There's a ton of other small features it adds that just elevates the experience of code review and we no longer review code on github.