[haasro] Reviewing exercise submission #32
Description
1. My own review
Link to repository || Link to the pull request
The AI tool was good at delivering a product that is overall coherent, readable, and well-structured. However, it failed to make some considerations in terms of practicality and generally relied too much on the code being self-documenting.
2. AI review
While I focused in my review on the code's readability and practicality, the AI tool focused on edge-cases and code style. We both criticized the gaps in the documentation. While I could have paid more attention to checking edge cases, I'm usually willing to let minor style issues pass, especially since I didn't include a code style to use in my prompt.
3. Challenge project reviews
Reviewers focused on:
- Considerations for breaking changes
- Project coherence (concretely: adapting the examples to a change)
- Unnecessary changes for stuff users are already used to
- Structural improvements
- Effectiveness of tests
Things like correct formatting and test coverage are already checked by the CI.