This sounds awful to me. Passing the tests is the starting point. It’s also important to make sure the code makes sense and is documented so whoever reads it 2 years from now (be that you, someone else, or I guess another llm) will understand what they are looking at. And that’s not even getting into if the code is efficient, or has other bugs or opportunities for bugs not captured by the test cases.
It’s also important to make sure the code makes sense and is documented so whoever reads it 2 years from now (be that you, someone else, or I guess another llm) will understand what they are looking at.
Fair points, although it seems to me the original commenter addresses this at the end of their first paragraph:
Then review the entire git diff and have it refactor as required to ensure clean and maintainable code while fixing any broken tests, lint errors, etc.
This sounds awful to me. Passing the tests is the starting point. It’s also important to make sure the code makes sense and is documented so whoever reads it 2 years from now (be that you, someone else, or I guess another llm) will understand what they are looking at. And that’s not even getting into if the code is efficient, or has other bugs or opportunities for bugs not captured by the test cases.
Fair points, although it seems to me the original commenter addresses this at the end of their first paragraph:
deleted by creator