similary i also solved the local search for all AI IDE tools i used and built a proactive memory and its all local completely and rest encrypted. myinventory.site
Seems to be mixing up linting with code review - though this does lint only the changes which is an option (I prefer to lint the whole codebase though)
What's the intended purpose? It seems to be protecting against a scenario where the package is not installed but the CLI is somehow running... But that seems like a very odd thing to be concerned about.
I'm assuming it's vibe coded, but it's a code smell I've noticed is specific to vibe coded projects.
AIs tend to have a debilitating phobia of any kind of exception. Claude especially will throw try/except and weird coersion everywhere in the code.
This bites you because it hides legitimate errors, even when the program is in such an unrecoverable state that it doesn't make logical sense to continue. It becomes impossible to debug, and requires the test suite to be absolutely perfect because you end up throwing away the only way for the language to warn you that something went wrong.
So while yes, it's relatively minor, like many code smells it is indicative that other things may be wrong.
Bro. I didn't had money fo claude code to review my codebase so i build this. And you are saying that i use claude code or anyother tools fot this. NOT GONNA LIE. I FORMATTED THE CODE FROM AI TO BE BREAKPROOF SO IN SOME CASES IT MAY LOOK AI GENERATED BUT ITS MOSTLY MY CODE WITH SOME AI TWEAKS.NOTHING MORE.
how is tjis better than (OpenCode|Pi|CC|Codex) that had a Reviewer agent? the whole idea of e.g. CodeRabbit is that it allows to review PRs autonomously. making it local defeats the purpose.
it doesnt help that these projects have AI generated README's. Not AI-assisted, or AI-curated, but fully generated. it's a bunch of sentences that say nothing. "the diff is whats reviewed". okay, what about per-commit reviews? does it keep context of that? just diffs isnt enough to review a PR, it just sounds efficient but youre leaving a lot of context out, so the reviewer will have trouble confidently reviewing your changes.
bro sorry if you felt inconvenience but i did it because my previous post from different account got flagged. so i just checked it by uploading whether it got post or not.it got somehow posted and it boomed so i was unable to delete it.
i renamed this project because we were having a conflict name with 2 big names. Theres an scut automation also there in google. There is also an github repo by facebookincublator nmaed scrut which is cli testing tool so i changed name.i removed the roadmap because when we changed name i have to manualyy change word scrut to avouch in roadmap.md so i deleted it and gonna add new soon. It solves just finding the problems for now.later we are gonna add features like ai integrtion, fixing codebase many more
All right, I could see the issues with the naming. Though I don’t understand solving the problems (linting) and adding ai how are different from ruff with git diff, I hope the roadmap eventually answers that.
31 comments
[ 1.5 ms ] story [ 29.7 ms ] threadAIs tend to have a debilitating phobia of any kind of exception. Claude especially will throw try/except and weird coersion everywhere in the code.
This bites you because it hides legitimate errors, even when the program is in such an unrecoverable state that it doesn't make logical sense to continue. It becomes impossible to debug, and requires the test suite to be absolutely perfect because you end up throwing away the only way for the language to warn you that something went wrong.
So while yes, it's relatively minor, like many code smells it is indicative that other things may be wrong.
it doesnt help that these projects have AI generated README's. Not AI-assisted, or AI-curated, but fully generated. it's a bunch of sentences that say nothing. "the diff is whats reviewed". okay, what about per-commit reviews? does it keep context of that? just diffs isnt enough to review a PR, it just sounds efficient but youre leaving a lot of context out, so the reviewer will have trouble confidently reviewing your changes.
Og: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49219370
Especially with a few commits just renaming the project and removing the roadmap.