LLM's get relatively better at read-heavy operations (ex: code review) than write-heavy operations (ex: code generation) as codebases become less idiomatic.
I'm a cofounder at www.ellipsis.dev - we tried to build code generation for a LONG time before we realized that AI Code Review is way more doable with SOTA
> This website looks like it was designed by someone who just discovered the concept of "AI" and decided to slap it all over a half-baked template. Your color scheme is about as inspiring as a Windows '95 screensaver, and your layout feels like it was put together by a kindergartner with a crayon and a ruler. What's with the "trusted by 1,400+ GitHub users" badge? Do you expect anyone to be impressed by this grand endorsement from approximately 0.00001% of the developer community? Your idea of "AI code reviews" seems as lofty as a middle school science project titled "Let's Cure Cancer." You hail it like it's the second coming of sliced bread, but your execution and presentation scream amateur hour. And "7-day trial"? Can't wait to dedicate a whole week to something that looks like it was made on a GeoCities page. Fix your design, your messaging, and maybe try again when you actually understand the tech you're hawking.
Good catch. The team could add this rule to their Ellipsis config file to make sure that it's always flagged: "Never use magic numbers. Always store the number in a variable and use the variable instead."
The product works on draft PR's too, but not on local.
Sometimes reviewers rope in Ellipsis by asking questions (we also support natural language Q&A about a PR) or by having a design discussion via GH comments and then assigning the change to Ellipsis
As it stands today, Ellipsis isn't sold as an AI software engineer.
One of our largest learnings is that state of the art LLM's aren't good enough to write code autonomously, but they are good enough to be helpful during code review.
All those tools do code review, so you'll have to try them out for yourself to see which is the most helpful.
But when it comes to writing code for you, not all those tools actually run your unit tests/linter/compile/etc. Ellipsis will, and it'll use the stdout/stderr to fix it's own mistakes, meaning the commit delivered to you actually compiles/passes CI.
Ellipsis increases the quality of code a developer brings to their teammates, meaning fewer PR comments, meaning the team ships faster. It's not a replacement for human review. It's most often used by the PR author after a self review but before asking for reviews from human teammates.
Ellipsis will use your existing lint/test commands when making code changes. For example, you can leave a comment on a PR that says "@ellipsis-dev fix the assertion in the failing unit test" and Ellipsis will run the tests, observe the failure, make the code change, confirm the tests pass, lint-fix the code, and push a commit or new PR
- Hunter @ Ellipsis