<?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 ./Code</title><link>https://blog.ouankou.com/tags/code-review/</link><description>Recent content in Code-Review on ./Code</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><copyright>© Anjia Wang</copyright><lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 13:40:11 -0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.ouankou.com/tags/code-review/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>A Human Review Guide For The REX Clang Frontend Stabilization PR</title><link>https://blog.ouankou.com/2026/05/27/a-human-review-guide-for-the-rex-clang-frontend-stabilization-pr/</link><pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.ouankou.com/2026/05/27/a-human-review-guide-for-the-rex-clang-frontend-stabilization-pr/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Large compiler PRs are hard to review.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The merged REX Clang frontend stabilization PR changed &lt;code&gt;275&lt;/code&gt; files. It included root-cause frontend fixes, midend consumer updates, test harness work, reference-output updates, submodule movement, hook fixes, and review follow-ups. Reading that diff from top to bottom is possible, but it is not the best way to understand risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The practical review question is different:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div class="highlight"&gt;&lt;div style="color:#f8f8f2;background-color:#272822;-moz-tab-size:4;-o-tab-size:4;tab-size:4;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;"&gt;
&lt;table style="border-spacing:0;padding:0;margin:0;border:0;"&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td style="vertical-align:top;padding:0;margin:0;border:0;"&gt;
&lt;pre tabindex="0" style="color:#f8f8f2;background-color:#272822;-moz-tab-size:4;-o-tab-size:4;tab-size:4;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span style="white-space:pre;-webkit-user-select:none;user-select:none;margin-right:0.4em;padding:0 0.4em 0 0.4em;color:#7f7f7f"&gt;1
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="white-space:pre;-webkit-user-select:none;user-select:none;margin-right:0.4em;padding:0 0.4em 0 0.4em;color:#7f7f7f"&gt;2
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td style="vertical-align:top;padding:0;margin:0;border:0;;width:100%"&gt;
&lt;pre tabindex="0" style="color:#f8f8f2;background-color:#272822;-moz-tab-size:4;-o-tab-size:4;tab-size:4;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;"&gt;&lt;code class="language-text" data-lang="text"&gt;&lt;span style="display:flex;"&gt;&lt;span&gt;What order lets a human reviewer find the dangerous parts first,
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="display:flex;"&gt;&lt;span&gt;without getting buried in generated references and mechanical cleanup?
&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/table&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt;This post is a review guide for that kind of PR. It is written for the reviewer who wants to audit a large compiler stabilization change after the fact, or review the next one without losing the plot.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>