I genuinely don’t understand why people still act like human review is some gold standard. most code reviews are a senior dev opening the PR between 3 other things, skimming the diff, leaving 2 comments and approving it. meanwhile a decent AI reviewer will read the entire thing in minutes, every single time, without getting bored halfway through a 900 line PR. yes, AI reviewers get things wrong. humans get things wrong too. except humans are slower, more inconsistent, way more expensive and tbh just worse i’ve been running macroscope and cursors bugbot on every signle PRs and at this point i’d trust either of them to find bugs over a random senior engineer doing a 15 minute review. people will hate this but i think “AI reviews first, humans only when needed” is obviously where this ends. what exactly are humans still better at that justifies them reviewing every PR? submitted by /u/Crafty_Survey9438
Originally posted by u/Crafty_Survey9438 on r/ClaudeCode
You must log in or # to comment.