> We found files shown earlier in a PR to receive more comments than files shown later

I often stop reviewing a PR if I have too many comments on it already that need to be addressed so I wouldn't say this is necessarily what it sounds like (later files get less attention). Also, a comment on an early file might address a concern in a later file that will be fixed by the time I actually review the later files.

That said, keep your PRs short and you won't have to worry about stuff like that.

▲

devnullbrain 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Read this as though it has a visibly bulging temple vein:

Does that mean you do the thing where I respond to your review, request a re-review, then get comments about code that was already there a week ago?!

	▲	lmm 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If your PR had lots of stuff that needs comments then I don't think you can reasonably expect me to check it fully in the first pass. E.g. if your first 3 functions are indented wrong, I'm going to write that they're indented wrong and not bother reading the rest of your PR until you've fixed that.

▲

zoover2020 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Can't seem to get anyone else to Baird the train of small CRs. It's so obvious