If I as a reviewer don’t know if the author used AI, I can’t even assume a single human (typically the author) has even read any or major parts of the code. I could be the first person reviewing it.
Not that it’s a great assumption to make, but it’s also fair to take a PR and register that the author wrote it, understands it, and considers it ready for production. So much work, outside of tech as well, is built on trust at least in part.
I find this disrespectful by the author.
I’m sure I’ve had colleagues at work that did this to me: throwing ai generated code at the reviewers with the mindset like "why should I look at it? That's what the reviewer does anyway".
I always passively call out the submitter on this stuff with comments like "Can you explain to me why you did this? Can you explain what this is expected to return" etc.
Usually gets them to sort out their behavior without directly making accusations that could be incorrect. If they really did write or strongly review the code, those questions are easy to answer.
If I as a reviewer don’t know if the author used AI, I can’t even assume a single human (typically the author) has even read any or major parts of the code. I could be the first person reviewing it.
Not that it’s a great assumption to make, but it’s also fair to take a PR and register that the author wrote it, understands it, and considers it ready for production. So much work, outside of tech as well, is built on trust at least in part.