I never review PRs, I always rubber-stamp them, unless they come from a certified idiot:

1. I don't care because the company at large fails to value quality engineering.

2. 90% of PR comments are arguments about variable names.

3. The other 10% are mistakes that have very limited blast radius.

It's just that, unless my coworker is a complete moron, then most likely whatever they came up with is at least in acceptable state, in which case there's no point delaying the project.

Regarding knowledge share, it's complete fiction. Unless you actually make changes to some code, there's zero chance you'll understand how it works.

> 2. 90% of PR comments are arguments about variable names.

This sort of comment is meaningless noise that people add to PRs to pad their management-facing code review stats. If this is going on in your shop, your senior engineers have failed to set a suitable engineering culture.

If you are one of the seniors, schedule a one-on-one with your manager, and tell them in no uncertain terms that code review stats are off-limits for performance reviews, because it's causing perverse incentives that fuck up the workflow.

Do people really argue about variable names? Most reviews comments I see are fairly trivial, but almost always not very subjective. (Leftover debug log, please add comment here, etc) Maybe it helps that many of our seniors are from a team where we had no auto-formatter or style guide at all for quite a while. I think everyone should experience that a random mix of `){` and `) {` does not really impact you in any way beyond the mild irking of a crooked painting or something. There's a difference between aesthetically bothersome and actually harmful. Not to say that you shouldn't run a formatter, but just for some perspective.

I'm very surprised by these comments...

I regularly review code that is way more complicated that it should.

The last few days I was going back and forth on reviews on a function that had originally cyclomatic complexity of 23. Eventually I got it down to 8, but I had to call him into a pair programming session and show him how the complexity could be reduced.

People always makes mistakes. Like forgetting to include a change. The point of PRs for me is to try to weed out costly mistakes. Automated tests should hopefully catch most of them though.

I used to do this! I can’t anymore, not with the advent of AI coding agents.

My trust in my colleagues is gone, I have no reason to believe they wrote the code they asked me to put my approval on, and so I certainly don’t want to be on a postmortem being asked why I approved the change.

Perhaps if I worked in a different industry I would feel like you do, but payments is a scary place to cause downtime.

[dead]