Rewriting my question so it doesn’t get flagged again: why don’t GitHub or Cursor build tools that make reviewing code really easy?

Posted by idontwant2makeausern@reddit | ExperiencedDevs | View on Reddit | 11 comments

Wouldn’t this be helpful? I want to be able to see intent and work history: why we were building this and what the constraints were and what requirements mattered, what changed and what failed and what tests worked and didn’t. This feels like something AI should be able to help with that should be built into an IDE or something. I have a product friend at GitHub and cursor I could ask about this but what do you think and what should it do?

[-]

experienceddevsb@reddit

This flair is only allowed on wednesday, saturday (UTC). Please repost on an allowed day. Intentionally trying to circumvent this rule will result in a suspension. See: https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/1rfhdrg/moderation_changes/

[-]

tictacotictaco@reddit

They do?

Cursor has a review bot that we've integrated with GitHub. You can write your own skill to review things a certain way, as well.

[-]

throwaway_0x90@reddit

This rewrite makes your question too vague.

At face value, the response is Github's PR UI is perfectly fine.

[-]

false79@reddit

You know everything you just posted can be a prompt that you can fire off after the code has been completed. Heck, it can be even be part of the process of generating a PR where the LLM assesses if the commits collectively address the requirements and whatever else is in your PR templates.

[-]

throwaway_0x90@reddit

🚩

[-]

przemo_li@reddit

Because good tools need compute. So if GitHub can offer current partly offering but still get clients they won't spend extra.

There are 3rd party services that do offer integration with GH and provide better UX for reviews.

That's as simple as that.

However GutHub does invest in git housing in general and into git algorithms and data structures. So I'm not saying that they are free riding their popularity. Just that Code Review doesn't seem to be the feature they see cost/benefit great enough compared to all the other things they work on.

[-]