PPhying中文
Curated security research, vulnerabilities, advisories and tools for practitioners.

Manual vs. Automated Code Review: When to Use Each

aikido.dev | blog | #automation | #code-review | #sast | #pull-request | #code-quality | #developer-practices
📄 Raw .md⬇️ Download .md🔗 Original ↗

Summary

Manual reviews shine at architecture and business logic; automation catches syntax errors and vulnerabilities at scale. The article weighs pros and cons of each and argues for a hybrid workflow.
Published
Collected

Related coverage

blog · about.gitlab.com
When to use SAST versus an LLM security scanner
AI-based review and SAST catch different classes of bugs and both have benefits. Here's how to decide which one runs where, and when your team needs both.
blog · hackerone.com
Why You Should Use Pull Requests: A Developer's Essential Tool
An overview of why pull requests matter: peer review catches bugs and standard violations early, improves team communication and knowledge sharing, and keeps the main codebase stable.
blog · hackerone.com
Reviewing One's Own Code
Before opening a pull request, developers should review their own code: shifting context, changing diff views, and pausing creates the cognitive distance to catch issues early.
blog · hackerone.com
Pull Requests 101
A beginner's guide to pull requests: what they are, why review-before-merge matters, how to create one, and the habits that make a pull request easy for maintainers to evaluate and accept.
blog · hackerone.com
Handling Code Reviews with Empathy
Explores handling code reviews with empathy, addressing how pull request conversations turn sour and how reviewers can give feedback that improves code without damaging working relationships.
blog · borghq.io
How Automatic Retests Verify a Fix When Your PR Merges
How Borg's Odin verifies fixes when a linked pull request merges: it reviews the merged code change rather than the running app, deciding whether a finding is resolved, plus its limits.
Back