I said code review was dead. Here’s what I got wrong – and right
The response to my original piece about killing the code review was loud. This is my attempt to address the comments.
The response to my original piece about killing the code review was loud. This is my attempt to address the comments.
Compare Aviator, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, and Tabnine to find the right fit for your team’s workflow and scale.
Teams that treat AI as a code printer will drown in slop and debt. Those who become the best at specifying what they want and verifying that they got it will get the promised 10x productivity boost.
Agents already write code faster than teams can review it. The way through is to move the critical decisions upstream, into specs that humans review before any code is written and acceptance criteria that agents can verify after.
Learn how AI coding standards prevent codebase fragmentation by turning individual knowledge into shared, reusable guidelines for both human and AI contributors.
AI coding agents work in isolation. Multiplayer AI coding uses shared specs so teams and their agents stay aligned across sessions and roles.
Comparing two ways of completing the same upgrade: migrating a Node.js 14 project to Node.js 18 by chatting with an AI assistant and performing the same migration through a spec-driven development approach, with a strict, pre-written plan.
Stop losing your best AI workflows to random markdown files.
Runbooks doesn’t replace Claude Code; it transforms AI from an individual tool into a multiplayer development platform through spec-driven development.
Spec-driven development replaces the chaos of ad hoc, prompt-driven vibe coding with a structured, durable way for engineering teams to work on AI coding projects.