For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
Read next
How I Cloned Myself with LLMs to Work 24/7 – Even While I Sleep
Digvijay Shelar -
How to Extend your AI Agent for Custom Developer Workflows
Rizèl Scarlett -
Deploying a Complete Machine Learning Fraud Detection Solution Using Amazon SageMaker : AWS Project
Shubham Murti -
Revolutionizing Identity Resolution with Machine Learning: A Technical Overview
Hana Sato -
Top comments (4)
Constructive code reviews. Nothing kills the motivation of team members faster than code reviews that either don't happen (resulting in the change requests atrophying) or do happen and they're either overly critical or held up due to minor or cosmetic improvements.
Less criticism means things can change faster, to avoid code being obsoleted in review. But we also have to be careful of too little criticism and lgtm culture.
I completely agree, I'm not sayjng we don't highlight issues at all. As a rule, I tend to highlight both positives and negatives in a review as well as being explicit when a cosmetic or minor change should not block an otherwise acceptable change request. These changes should not block a PR and can be fixed in a follow-up change.
Ah yes, very elusive in our field