[iot_devs]

This is an huge issue for us in a very big and complex codebase with a lot of engineers working on it.

Code review is hard because the diff always looks reasonable, the tests always pass and all the basic stuff are always checked.

However, it happens often that, even if the changes looks reasonable they are wrong.

The whole architecture may drift after one bad change that looks reasonable.

As always this is not strictly a problem with the tooling, but more of culture and knowledge sharing.

And we are not going to solve it with a better tool.

[zmj]

> the tests always pass

> it happens often that, even if the changes looks reasonable they are wrong

I’m having trouble reconciling these two statements.

When I review code, I’m rarely looking for bugs. Instead I’m looking for tests that would catch those bugs.

[thfuran]

Do you have tests that verify that an abstraction hasn't sprung a leak?

[talent_deprived]

A somewhat minor nitpick, the word huge begins with a consonant sound, not a vowel sound. It would be correct to write "a huge issue" not "an huge issue".

[beaugunderson]

depends if you pronounce it 'uge or not ;P

(which is why you see some people write an history, because of the 'istory pronunciation)