How CodeRabbit AI code reviews streamline development. - Source: dev.to / 24 days ago

CodeRabbit is the best AI code review tool for GitHub and GitLab. Sign up and get a free trial for your team or organization. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

According to their official site, CodeRabbit is an AI-based code reviewer and summarizer for GitHub pull requests, utilizing OpenAI's gpt-3.5-turbo and gpt-4 models. It is designed to be used as a GitHub Action and can be configured to run on every pull request and review comments. - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago

After completing your review, employ automated AI-based code review tools such as CodeRabbit. These tools can quickly analyze code for common issues, style inconsistencies, and potential bugs, providing an immediate second opinion on the PR. - Source: dev.to / 4 months ago

Since its inception, CodeRabbit has experienced steady growth in its user base, comprising developers and organizations. Installed on thousands of repositories, CodeRabbit reviews several thousand pull requests (PRs) daily. - Source: dev.to / 5 months ago

Reviewable.io — Code review for GitHub repositories, free for public or personal repos. - Source: dev.to / 4 months ago

Yep, I agree! I work at, and use, Reviewable (https://reviewable.io) and we're the best way to review code on GitHub because we've focused on making the whole process better at every step. We've improved diffing, not only for large files (we support larger files than GitHub does) but also for understanding that diff. Have you ever reviewed a PR twice, but the second time around all your comments are gone and you... - Source: Hacker News / 8 months ago

Https://reviewable.io is the earliest full-powered Critique alternative for GitHub. It supports some cool things Critique doesn't/didn't, such as reviewing multi-commit branches (also across history-rewriting force-push cleanups), and indicating exactly the nature of your comment (just FYI, or you want this to be changed before you'll give your approval). (I was an intern in the initial making of Critique, and... - Source: Hacker News / 9 months ago

The linux kernel, which is open source and does want contributors, is doing more-or-less just fine with an email-based PR and review flow. If it's an open source project, it should be using an open source review platform that allows improvements and specialization of the code hosting too. Using github, where the review tools are bad and can't be improved by an outsider, is a slap in the face to open source.... - Source: Hacker News / 11 months ago

>See reviewer presence so that you can see if someone is already reviewing and avoid unnecessary pings. >Visibly values privacy and security above all else These two things seem squarely at odds. Personally, I don't want my code review tool announcing to developers when I'm looking at their PR. The fact that it's a Chrome extension would also be a big blocker for me. I run a dev team, and I wouldn't... - Source: Hacker News / 12 months ago