历史资料 · 待逐条复核
此条为历史采集资料，标题、日期及摘录尚未完成逐条复核，可能存在截断或过时。保留供追溯，不能视为本站已确认的新闻或推荐。
来源摘录（采集内容）
We think "did a human read the code?" is an imprecise proxy for "what could go wrong with this change, and which check—automated or human—is the right one to catch it?" Asking that question also changed when review happens. Before, review was a gate at the end of the road: write the code, open a PR, wait for your colleague. Now, review runs continuously, more like spellcheck while you write. Most changes have been reviewed and fixed by Claude at least once before a human is asked to look. This catches most routine mistakes, and saves team attention for higher-level questions and scrutiny. — Addy Osmani, Morgan Westlee Lunt, and Qing Wang , How the Claude Code team does code review Tags: anthropic , claude , ai , claude-code , llms , addy-osmani , coding-agents , generative-ai , agentic-engineering , code-review
We think "did a human read the code?" is an imprecise proxy for "what could go wrong with this change, and which check—automated or human—is the right one to catch it?" Asking that question also changed when review happens. Before, review was a gate at the end of the road: write the code, open a PR, wait for your colleague. Now, review runs continuously, more like spellcheck while you write. Most changes have been reviewed and fixed by Claude at least once before a human is asked to look. This catches most routine mistakes, and saves team attention for higher-level questions and scrutiny. — Addy Osmani, Morgan Westlee Lunt, and Qing Wang , How the Claude Code team does code review Tags: anthropic , claude , ai , claude-code , llms , addy-osmani , coding-agents , generative-ai , agentic-engineering , code-review