• 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    It’s all the fucking job is now

    I long for the days when I reviewed something, noticed an issue, commented, the recieving engineer learned something and we all got better as a result

    Now I basically get the privilege of wasting 10 mins and telling someone they fucked up in a way unfathomable to them, because they haven’t got a clue what they just put in front of me

    Oh and it’s my manager’s manager doing it

  • disorderly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Yes, but the situation is getting strange.

    Our model has always been that the reviewer is responsible for protecting the repository. This led to one IC getting fired for “letting in” a catastrophic bug his teammate generated with Claude.

    • Bobby Turkalino@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’m sorry that you work at a company that thinks code reviews and tests guarantee bug-free code.

      The primary function of code reviews is to increase visibility, and therefore maintainability. It keeps other members of the team in the loop about how codebase is changing and how it might affect their current or future work.

      The primary function of tests is to catch regressions, not new bugs, and especially not new bugs related to use cases that weren’t even possible in previous versions