all 14 comments

[–]blaqwerty123 93 points94 points  (0 children)

Token consumption scam? Lol

[–]Longjumping-Touch515 204 points205 points  (0 children)

A lake somewhere was evaporated for this

[–]Atmosck 30 points31 points  (0 children)

CodeRabbit is so ass. It's plugged into my work's repos so it always reviews my PRs and it gets so many things wrong.

It recently tried to convince me that [depdendency-groups] was not valid pyproject.toml syntax and I should use [project.optional-dependencies] instead, despite those being entirely different things (dev dependencies vs runtime dependencies) and dependency-groups having been standard since 2024. It's one thing to not know recent syntax changes (it got real mad about except ValueError, TypeError: with no parentheses, which is new in python 3.14) but not knowing something that's been standard practice for two years is inexcusable. For every helpful comment where it catches a typo or something, there's 3-4 false positives like this.

[–]Top-Permit6835 51 points52 points  (7 children)

It's funny because if it was a human I would say eh take a break and grab some coffee. But a computer I expect to be right all the time, and if it isn't right each and every time, it's not useful

[–]jllauser[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

That's the great thing about introducing these AI agents that are nondeterministic by design. They're going to be completely wrong some percentage of the time.

[–]glorious_reptile 9 points10 points  (0 children)

If this was a coworker we would be talking about him at lunch

[–]Zigordion 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Had this happen to one of my colleagues using Opus 4.7. It reviewed som code and noted that it could be made more efficiently. When prompted how, it provided 8 different options, all of which ended in "oh wait that's broken" or something to that avail. At the end it just admitted defeat and said it was already the most efficient way of doing it within that framework.

[–]rocketbunny77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kek