Feat: AI review integration on Github - #218
Conversation
ThomasB-Colibri
changed the title
hJaffaliColibritd
changed the title
|
|
||
| Start by understanding the pull request's stated goal and its complete diff against | ||
| the merge base. Review changed behavior in context: inspect callers, sibling | ||
| implementations, tests, public exports, and documentation. Do not report unrelated |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add requirements ?
| ## Review objective | ||
|
|
||
| Review MPQP as a user-facing scientific library and as a provider-independent | ||
| abstraction over several quantum SDKs. Prioritize observable correctness, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"observable correctness" is confusing, clarify or just keep "correctness of the result " ?
| not for implementing a change. Do not modify the pull request unless the user asks | ||
| for fixes explicitly. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Review objective |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add performing local tests, (or adding tests and running them?), to check correct resutls and behavior from user point of view, and no error / bug / performance problems introduced
|
|
||
| Start by understanding the pull request's stated goal and its complete diff against | ||
| the merge base. Review changed behavior in context: inspect callers, sibling | ||
| implementations, tests, public exports, and documentation. Do not report unrelated |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
clarify what is "public exports"
| not for implementing a change. Do not modify the pull request unless the user asks | ||
| for fixes explicitly. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Review objective |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't know where to put it, but for small fixes and syntax, or small mistakes, put directly a suggestion of change in the comment of the commit (so the user can directly accept or not the change, but the AI don't act and don't modify)
| - shared mutable defaults such as `[]` or `{}`; | ||
| - shallow copies presented as deep copies, or redundant `deepcopy` calls; | ||
| - one instruction reused in multiple positions or circuits; | ||
| - stale cached environment/provider state; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
clarify this point, not clear
3 participants
No description provided.