Actual code review is very slow. More often than not, you just looking for glaring mistakes, not that the code actually respect the specifications. Which results in the LGTM comment. Because you trust the other person's experience. In very critical system, change is very slow to get in.
Ruling out or refining an approach on the grounds it’s unlikely to lead to a suitable outcome (fixing and removing slop) is not the same as saying this code or approach represents a good enough outcome given what we currently know about the constraints of the problem (code review)
Actual code review is very slow. More often than not, you just looking for glaring mistakes, not that the code actually respect the specifications. Which results in the LGTM comment. Because you trust the other person's experience. In very critical system, change is very slow to get in.
The "instant" to which you refer was meaning that I can tell instantly if the LLM generated what I wanted or not.
That doesn't mean it's reviewed, it means I'm accepting it to _BE_ what I go with and ultimately review.
Ruling out or refining an approach on the grounds it’s unlikely to lead to a suitable outcome (fixing and removing slop) is not the same as saying this code or approach represents a good enough outcome given what we currently know about the constraints of the problem (code review)