PRprakashqwerty·Apr 2, 2026Submission
Linux Kernel Technical Deep-Dive Patterns
2 points · Open discussionmasoncl
review-prompts
Python2026–2026
masoncl / review-prompts
review-prompts
AI review prompts
2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
993GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
AI review prompts
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by week2 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2026-01-27 10:00:34 UTC to 2026-04-02 14:27:53 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26 | 2026-01-26 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-02-02 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Feb 2 | 2026-02-02 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-02-09 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 9 | 2026-02-09 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-02-16 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 16 | 2026-02-16 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-02-23 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 23 | 2026-02-23 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-03-02 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2 | 2026-03-02 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-03-09 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 9 | 2026-03-09 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-03-16 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 16 | 2026-03-16 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-03-23 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 23 | 2026-03-23 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-03-30 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 30 | 2026-03-30 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
What Hacker News says
2 sourcesMy experience is that basic generic agents are useless but an agent with extensive prompting about your usecase is extremely valuable.
In my case using these prompts:
https://github.com/masoncl/review-prompts
Took things from "pure noise" to a world where, if you say there's a bug in your patch, people's first question will be "has the AI looked at it?"
FWIW in my case the AI has never yet found _the_ bug I was hunting for but it has found several _other_ significant bugs. I also ran it against old commits that were already reviewed by excellent engineers and running in prod. It found a major bug that wasn't spotted in human review.
Most of the "noise" I get now just leads me to say "yeah I need to add more context to the commit message". E.g the model will say "you forgot to do X" when X is out of scope for the patch and I'm doing it in
Read the rest
a later one. So ideally the commit messages should mention this anyway.