logoalt Hacker News

aidanlisteryesterday at 10:56 PM3 repliesview on HN

This just sounds like you haven’t worked in a team environment in the last 12 months.

The ergonomics of doing this in pre-commit make no sense.

Spin up a PR in GitHub and get Cursor and/or Claude to do a code review — it’s amazing.

It’ll often spot bugs (not only obvious ones), it’ll utilise your agent.md to spot mismatched coding style, missing documentation, it’ll check sentry to see if this part of the code touches a hotspot or a LOC that’s been throwing off errors … it’s an amazing first pass.

Once all the issues are resolved you can mark the PR as ready for review and get a human to look big picture.

It’s unquestionably a huge time saver for reviewers.

And having the AI and human review take place with the same UX (comments attached to lines of code, being able to chat to the AI to explain decisions, having the AI resolve the comment when satisfied) just makes sense and is an obvious time saver for the submitter.


Replies

Sharlinyesterday at 11:20 PM

Stuff like coding style and missing documentation is what your basic dumb formatter and linter are supposed to do, using a LLM for such things is hilarious overkill and waste of electricity.

show 1 reply
mvanbaakyesterday at 11:04 PM

why not have AI review your code BEFORE you share it with the team ? that shows so much more respect to the rest of the team then just throwing your code into the wild, only to change it because some robot tells you that X could be Y

wakawaka28yesterday at 11:01 PM

It makes as much sense to use AI in pre-commit as it does to use a linter.