Comment by ramon156
3 days ago
I'm of the hot opinion that a reviewer shouldn't be running code. The one making the code is responsible for the fix, code reviews are just about maintainability.
If your PR did not fix the issue or implement the feature, that's on you, not the reviewer.
I don't know about "shouldn't", I think it's fine if they do. But I basically agree, at some fundamental level, you have to have some trust in your coworkers. If someone says "This fixes X", and they haven't even tried running it or testing it, they shouldn't be your coworker. The purpose of code reviews shouldn't be "is this person honest?" or "is this person totally incompetent?". If they're not, it's a much bigger issue, one that shouldn't be dealt with through code reviews.
Very different situation if it's open source or an external contribution, of course.
The author mentioned that he doesn't want to make suggestions that don't actually work. That seems like a pretty valid reason to run the code.