<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>code review on Agile Software Development</title>
    <link>https://agilesoftdev.com/tags/code-review/</link>
    <description>Recent content in code review on Agile Software Development</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://agilesoftdev.com/tags/code-review/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>AI Pair Programming Has Not Eliminated Code Review — It Has Made It Harder</title>
      <link>https://agilesoftdev.com/ai-pair-programming-has-not-eliminated-code-review-it-has-made-it-harder/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://agilesoftdev.com/ai-pair-programming-has-not-eliminated-code-review-it-has-made-it-harder/</guid>
      <description>The promise was efficiency. Feed the prompt, review the output, merge the diff. What teams discovered instead is that AI-assisted code review is more cognitively demanding than reviewing code written by a colleague — not less — because the nature of the errors has changed.
When a human writes a bug, there is usually a traceable cause: a misunderstood requirement, a missed edge case, a copy-paste error. The bug has an author with intent.</description>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>
