GlyphI've seen a lot of people talking about the practice of code review in a way that I consider unrealistic lately. So here are my thoughts on what code review is—and isn't—for: https://blog.glyph.im/2026/03/what-is-code-review-for.html
Sorry for the jump scare in the back half, but, this is my attempt to (A) write about The Problem without comprehensively making everything *about* The Problem all the time, and, (B) hack off a bit of useful philosophizing and writing from my Enormous Never-Going-To-Be-Finished Omnibus Post
Your weary 'net denizen@glyph It worries me that I see people talking about using LLMs to perform code review.
Dima@glyph To check the "I use AI" box at work, I've started using Copilot to "review" the code.
I kick it off at the very end: either before approving the PR when I'm a reviewer, or before requesting a review for a peer.
The goal is to keep my reviewing skills sharp by making sure that I find all the issues and the Copilot run is clean.
Is it useful? I'm not sure. I definitely think AI reviews don't worth burning the planet.
Copilot is very good at correcting natural English. This is neat, but should be easily caught by human.
Copilot might be a mix of static code analysis tools mixed together with LLMs (is it what agents are basically are), because it found some inconsistencies.
I would rather configure dedicated tools to do this and use them as I'm writing the code.