If a change makes sense, a different frontier model can usually figure out why it was made from the code alone. I take that as a signal that that the commit is good.
replyI believe they can do this due to having millions of public pull requests and github issues in their training data.
There's pretty much always several plausible reasons for why a change was made. What's interesting is knowing exactly which one, especially when it later turns out to be wrong!
replyWhat a change does is self documenting. Why it was made and why that specific approach was chosen could be due to many things, such as:
reply* business objectives,
* the result of experimentation,
* the result of an offline conversation
etc.
This cannot be captured in code alone. This is why we write commit messages.
the mechanism is self documenting; context is not unless you pollute all your files with an ADR's worth of alternatives.
reply