I posted this as a comment over in /r/ClaudeAI and decided I’d ask over here for suggestions on how to improve my workflow. Welcome to any constructive criticism that isn’t simply a Claude vs Codex flame. Do we still call them flames or am I showing my age?
At the moment my workflow as a sole developer is that I develop in Claude Code Opus 4.7 xhigh and have Codex automatically review my PRs on GitHub via Continuous Integration. Codex responds with comments right in the PR. You can make those comments merge blockers until they’re resolved, which I have (although you can override this if you choose). Depending on the complexity of the PR, Codex will find issues often. And by often, I mean most of the time. Severity varies of course. I have CC read, respond to, and fix Codex’ comments right from the PR so that I have an audit trail in the PR body, i.e. “codex has comments on the PR”. If necessary I iterate on this and don’t merge until it’s clean, or until I decide that Codex is being petty, which is rare. To date I don’t think I’ve ever seen CC disagree with a Codex issue, but once or twice Claude Code has given a heavy sigh and said something like “That’s a nit, but fair enough.” I’ve tried it the other way, developing in Codex and reviewing PRs with Claude Code, but I don’t like it quite as much because that puts me using Codex for UI work, which we all know is subpar at the moment. Also, Claude Code doesn’t find issue with Codex’ code very often. Whether that’s because Codex is that much better at writing code or because CC is a lazy reviewer, I haven’t quantified. But given Anthropic’s behavior trying to limit compute lately, my money is on the latter. So for now I have chosen to stick with Codex reviewing CC. submitted by /u/CloisteredOyster
Originally posted by u/CloisteredOyster on r/ClaudeCode