- I review once the code is functionally doing what I am looking for.
- I try to keep the features small so that the code is manageable.
- After manually reviewing, I ask it to review the code. Assuming you have coding standards well defined, you will find that it may not follow those standards during development so having an isolated review step seems to provide better results.
- I review once the code is functionally doing what I am looking for.
- I try to keep the features small so that the code is manageable.
- After manually reviewing, I ask it to review the code. Assuming you have coding standards well defined, you will find that it may not follow those standards during development so having an isolated review step seems to provide better results.
My workflow is basically:
1. Explain the goal.
2. Tell it the constraints (readable, simple, don't overengineer).
3. Give it our repo structure and coding conventions.
4. Let another model review it.
5. Group the feedback by category instead of one long list.
It's easier to work through the review that way.