On Wed, 21 Oct 2026, Uros Bizjak via Gcc wrote: > 2. Run an AI-assisted review where available. Give the tool real > context, not only the diff: the surrounding code, the relevant machine > description or front-end code, and the testsuite results. Reviews of a > bare diff are much shallower.
If we want to suggest AI-assisted review then I think we should provide functionality in the forge (this could be some kind of bot that looks for particular comments and acts on them, it doesn't need any heavy integration) for "do an AI-assisted review and show me the results privately" and "do an AI-assisted review and post the results to this pull request". (Where it's not the responsibility of the individual contributor to provide the AI or the instructions to the AI on how to carry out the review.) "show me the results privately" could be used both by the original contributor (reduce the noise in the pull request from successive iterations and AI reviews until they consider it to be ready for human review), and by someone reviewing the pull request (who then examines the AI results and decides which of them are worth surfacing for the attention of the original contributor, rather than giving the contributor unfiltered AI output they didn't ask for). Note that this means community-agreed review rubrics rather than each person having their own idea of what's a suitable review (and beginners probably not having a very good idea of what instructions to give). -- Joseph S. Myers [email protected]
