diff --git "a/plbart_lora_official_0.001/complete_results.json" "b/plbart_lora_official_0.001/complete_results.json" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/plbart_lora_official_0.001/complete_results.json" @@ -0,0 +1,40694 @@ +{ + "test_bleu_4": 0.0035394261160096216, + "test_exact_match": 0.0, + "test_rouge": { + "rouge1": 0.11349962453581913, + "rouge2": 0.012938904845239704, + "rougeL": 0.09602034140842945, + "rougeLsum": 0.09599000944730338 + }, + "test_bertscore": { + "precision": 0.8275079841001369, + "recall": 0.8290171797196532, + "f1": 0.8264821127565553 + }, + "test_meteor": 0.07583130397914625, + "raw_data": [ + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((()))()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "can we also test for `transport=rest`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the backend class. I don't think we should move this to the backend class. I think we should move this into the backend class. I think we should move this into the backend class.", + "reference": "If record_batch_size is not set in config.ini, this code will trigger a notice about an undefined value. I would suggest either wrapping the setPageSize() call in an `if (!empty(...)) {` check, or else providing a default value in the set call (i.e. `$config->Index->record_batch_size?? 100`)." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I didn't realize we were hardcoding this, thanks for moving it to an env value." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We are trying to support IE 10-11, so we'll need a polyfill for this one, I think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "It looks like there's a new `isNavigatingTo( url )` selector for this very purpose so let's use this here instead. This way we just need to use the one selector rather than two. Let's assign that to a similar-named variable here (e.g. `isNavigatingToPostResetURL`) rather than the prop it's used with." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I think im2col should only accommodate CPUMat." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "alpha sort the imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Can you explain why is this necessary? Is `snprintf()` with four integer arguments unsafe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to use `getForegroundObject()` instead of `getForegroundObject()`", + "reference": "How likely would it be that the keyboard layout for the NVDA main thread differs from the keyboard layout of the currently focused app?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Would you mind removing the default parameter above? (I doubt I'll ever use defaults again since you still have to protect against callers explicitly passing `null` or `undefined`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Also update line 2205 below" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "n_: It is a good practice to name the variable to indicate what they contain. In this case since `shared` is supposed to have boolean, calling it: `isShared` can help in the readability of the code." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to re-render the table afterward. I think we need to re-render the table afterward.", + "reference": "I suppose it's a false-positive error. Maybe there is a way to configure the `eslint-*` package to accept `i.e..... lower case` syntax" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "this maynot be a perf issue, if ToHexString() is not actually allocating a string, but returns the caches string value. to be confirmed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a log message.", + "reference": "`zap.String(\"image-provider\", provider.Name())` should be in a same line." + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be set to 300?", + "reference": "Why this deletion?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.", + "reference": "This change looks unrelated to the CL description?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I'm not certain that `res`+`utl` isn't a thing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `FetchActiveFlowDao` class.", + "reference": "This method can cause bugs. Why don't you use list of finalize statuses and then use join by comma and that will give you correct value. Use Apache Commons Lang library List list = Arrays.asList(1,2,3,4,5,6,7); String str = org.apache.commons.lang.StringUtils.join(list, \",\"); You can use it at multiple places shown in this diff." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Merge with next condition" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Maybe add it when it is used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list.", + "reference": "More clear naming: NONEXISTENT_ENABLED" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( get(( get( get get get get get get", + "reference": "why is this change necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "make a SchemaTypeNameConverter.getTypeNameForEmptyType() and call that here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Use braces on your conditional structures please" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Great God, I have a question. This \".nebula_history\" file is used to save history commands. Is there a file size limit? When the file is large, does it take a long time to start initialization (loadHistory)? How did you think about this? Thx." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))())(((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Isn't this the same check as two lines above?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Don't redefine, just import the existing one in `cmdline.py`. :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "why not call `respond_to?(\"#{name}=\")` from the `if` line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "This was properly set above as `.runfiles/` (with a fallback to workspace root dir) but never used past this line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Are all these namespaces required for this attribute?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Given this may be used and printed in other ways, isn't `debug` more appropriate?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Looks like this is unused? Did you mean to call it when clearing the block journal?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "why named alters? how about this.alerts = alerts?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "not sure if this has to be here or not tbh" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep the topic name under 50 characters as per Azure limits. I don't think we should keep the topic name under 50 characters as per Azure limits. I don't think we should keep the topic name under 50 characters as per Azure limits.", + "reference": "There's a better fix for this in #1741, which should replace this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this. I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "Use swarm.Address not []byte as type, and construct it from actual byteslice or use swarm.NewAddress if it is constructed from hex-encoded string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "It would be worth factoring this out to a function, but you don't have to do that here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "There's no need for `final` in interfaces." + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a", + "reference": "Isn't this case handled as a custom tag in `Span.SetTag()` below? This switch is only for special tags that actually set `Span` properties." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This shouldn't be changed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.", + "reference": "This one is important `2: I102 copyright year is outdated, expected 2014 but got 2012`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "Are these imports needed (BiConsumer and Consumer)? If they are unused imports, then precommit will fail." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Why are we catching and logging exceptions? By doing that we make it look like the job has succeeded and it will be removed from the queue - if we didn't do that then it would stay queued..." + }, + { + "prediction": "Please fix this issue.", + "reference": "If there are `@param` tags in docblock, there should be `@return` tag also. (applies for a whole file)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Is the concept of validators exclusive to IBFT2? I wonder if this category should be more explicitly linked to IBFT2." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";\";;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Spotless is configured to reject star imports. Please replace with explicit imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant. I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Remind me why you are using CUDA vocabulary when naming these variables." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Please turn the iteration order around (instead of `0...size` to `size...0`). The reason is that this sometimes skips indices when removing an item. You can therefore end up with feeds that have counter 0 and are still displayed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return pipeline if solid subset is None.", + "reference": "this is a behavior change. solid_subset=[] represents an empty pipeline where as solid_subset=None is the full pipeline" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log error.", + "reference": "this is a breaking change, any specific reason you want to do this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Blocking: we still want read write separation. Node functions should absolutely not write to the chain store and the interface should reflect that. Only the syncer should have this capability in production code. It should be no problem to keep casting chainForTest to a read-write interface, or doing other function decomposition and automatic casting tricks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "The PR description says the lowest on-demand request priority is `2^30`. Why the `-1` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "checking health again? I think it is not necessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in the `healthAggregator.Report` method.", + "reference": "Need an `if err == nil {break}` above this line so that we don't log/sleep if the retry succeeds." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "to reiterate my point above, this class is not the actual provided Promise, but rather something a user can provide a Promise to/with. I think a name like `PromiseProvider` is more appropriate." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "I guess we can only call this from a post-build function, but we might need to check that this target is to be built? I guess target A depends on B which has a post build. We `plz build :B` which adds C as a dep of A. Won't we queue C to be built even though it only needs to build if A needs to be built? That's kinda why I approached this the way I did. I trust you've thought about this but would be good to understand this a bit better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "You should use `isinstance()` instead of comparing the class name to a string." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a video or audio?", + "reference": "Why should audio and video elements always return `false` for `isHidden`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This obviously won't work for all the other platforms." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Isn't he diamond operator Java7+?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception.", + "reference": "Prefer adding a second `positive(String, double)` that delegates down to this three-param version. Using `null` in code is generally Not A Great Idea, and it looks ugly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "This pattern, where we add a new parameter without using it, often indicates to me that we've got a leaky interface or abstraction. I see this pattern _a lot_ in this patch, so wondering you have thoughts about it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This seems like an improved pattern :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`open_id_authentication` is no longer the name of the function, and it's not OpenID specific" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This didn't require corresponding changes to the test case(s)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "A question! I think `string` totally works, but what do you think of `*string` for consistency?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `aws.cluster.sigs.k8s.io/control-plane-ready` file.", + "reference": "Should this be: `aws.infrastructure.cluster.sigs.k8s.io` instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Not clear on why this change is correct." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Hi Simon. Whether this should return true depends on what byte buffers are used? The same applies to ByteBufferIndexInput, actually... I don't think you can generally tell whether the ByteBuffers the input operates on come from a mmap call or from somewhere else (even direct buffers don't have to be a result of mmap)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "All stories in this file also need to have the default padding." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I don't think these asserts are necessary, because `subsurface_find_sibling` already searches in the parent. Or am I missing something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Episode` model.", + "reference": "Should this be `number` instead of `id`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I have forgotten why we thought this restriction is necessary. A user registers a Hive/HBase table with us but is not able to use the table with the registered name in DML. Will UPDATE STATs will be on the original name too (and update stats code will find out registered name and use it for Table_uid?). This was the registration concept is almost like an internal implementation idea, at some point could even be done by some utility program for all existing Hive/hBase tables, and the user need not be aware of it? I am struggling with a user would want to register a table, if they cannot use it by that name." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((),(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Should most of these non-globals be static?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "Please do not approve PRs without tests!!!!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Now that you handle this in `webenginetab.py` you can undo all the changes in this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we should log the exception to a log file instead of printing it. The current behavior (not catching the exception) should lead to an automatic print of the exception to the terminal/console." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "These changes to the resource helpers have some more far-reaching implications as they also affect calls made in hive-operator, I believe. It's probably OK still, though. Ideally, the resource helper would not be the one doing the logging, since it cannot know the severity, but that is well beyond something that we should tackle for this PR. I would rather have the hive-operator log warnings than have the syncsetinstance controller log errors." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the `export_category_id` to the `ExportCategory` table.", + "reference": "do you really want to change the behavior on foreign key?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be in the event_publish_state_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event_event", + "reference": "Looks like my bad. Thanks for fixing!" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))()((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "I think \"Don't replace variables...\" would be cleaner." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the projection to None. I don't think we should change the projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projectionProjection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection", + "reference": "Do you validate the possible strings? I've not read the code below but we should make sure if a string is supplied it is validate..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I'd recommend using generateDataDiskName here as well -- might as well benefit from the safety that it gives to protect yourself from future changes to w.ID()." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the position from a manifest?", + "reference": "qq: do we want to include anything in the name to indicate that it is a position in the manifest?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "These logs should probably use the `LOGTAG`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.", + "reference": "From this, it was clear, that we are using our version of wireguard-go. And now it looks like we are using original packages which is confusing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Any particular reason for this? This potentially will make harder to investigate users issues" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Do you also need to check if Blockly.localConnection_ is non-null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Not really a container, and it's not just about non-config data, not sure of a better description, @myronmarston?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "The desktop app will load this fine. on iOS I get `TypeError: undefined is not an object (evaluating '_$$_REQUIRE(_dependencyMap[8], \"stream\").Readable.Readable')` if I change it to `const Readable = require('stream').Readable;` or `const { Readable } = require('stream');` I get undefined errors from the stream on iOS: `[TypeError: stream.on is not a function. (In'stream.on(\"data\", function (chunk) { return chunks.push(chunk); })','stream.on' is undefined)]` What am I missing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to copy the data here. I don't think we need to copy the data here.", + "reference": "this is needed since the chunk feeder shares memory across calls to the pipeline. this is in order to avoid multiple allocations. this change mimics the behavior of shed and localstore, and copies the data from the call into the in-memory store" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "wut. We can do this at the beginning of tests if we want right? Why are we depending on init?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Same trick here IMO." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should be `@origin = element || origin || POINTER`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "this example needs a fix?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove the `destroy` function.", + "reference": "Is it safe to assume this surface is a toplevel?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `projCtx_free()` function.", + "reference": "we don't need that function" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in the `Platform` class.", + "reference": "we'll also have to think about adding \"Windows Server 2014\" or whatever they come up with later." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "curious do we have an API to fetch an inactive flow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "This branch is not needed anymore because every `vnode` that passes through `h` in compat or core will have the `$$typeof`-property now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `shouldMatchElement(getComposedParent(el));`", + "reference": "Did you mean to use `hasAttribute`? You shouldn't. This does not improve performance and it messes with the readability." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please import modules and not classes (except for Qt stuff)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Hm... why do we have a \"DummyJavaNode\" in src/main? Looks like, this should have gone into src/test...." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This seems meaningless. If we cannot add any info let us remove this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you rename `Ports` to `PortsUnsafe`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This feels like it could be moved out to your first gem!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The expected behaviour for `poll` would be to match what `Deque` does, which is: > Retrieves and removes the head of the queue represented by this deque As such, you shouldn't need the `RequestId` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Array` class.", + "reference": "This is super minor, but it'd be nice if this iterated over an arbitrary number of array inputs." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((( code code code", + "reference": "What is the problem here? The commit message has strange wording \"readlink is defined with restrict pointers\": do you mean \"restricted\"? Is that a well-defined language term? I'm not sure what it means." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))#####endendendendendendendendend))))))))))))))))))))#endendendendendend#endendendendend))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Why are we not wrapping here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "I though that all data objects are being unified in the fashion where all default values are initialized in constructor, are not they?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Does this file actually need to be committed to git? Having to run `make generate` is rather tedious on each PR and it conflicts easily." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "We don't need this anymore, as Google's library handles various auth mechanisms for us. We'll be less explicit about why we're failing but we gain support for several authentication methods- swings and roundabouts!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "No need to speficy attribute here. Moreover in yaml it is default to use lowercase names." + }, + { + "prediction": "Why not just use System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.Task.", + "reference": "In general I'm a trying to understand the reason behind this PR. Looks like if a blob (name) already exists we check if the contents are identical? In what scenarios this is not the case? When we want to publish a package/asset that has changed but still we want to use the same version?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can rename `req` to be `opener`, since that is the object, and it wraps `req` internally?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "@MichaelDCurran, thoughts on adding a breakpoint format field attribute? It seems almost app specific, but I guess it does seem odd abusing line-prefix. Is there any more generic concept here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "This would return a tuple of two dictionaries. You need to combine them and return a dictionary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.", + "reference": "What do you think of moving the example to the help text of the prompt? and the prompt itself can be \"What is your application's GitHub repository URL?\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Break out tests for events into their own tests rather than placing them in other ones. That makes it easier for us to figure out where problems lie and to do a TDD-driven implementation over new APIs." + }, + { + "prediction": "))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Nice use of std::distance. I'm a bit worried about first += 9 though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this be `app.kubernetes.io/managed-by` as prometheus-operator manages this resource, but this resource isn't a part of prometheus-operator?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "As long as we're being extra-vigilant about NREs, should we check that `httpMethod` and `requestUri` are not null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "No need to have `xrc20` alias" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "the naming convention I'm been adopting if `_type` for instances of these classes. So maybe `context_config_type` is a better name for this fn" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a boolean.", + "reference": "Don't call it GPU mining, call it `externalMining`, here and throughout." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`within this with` typo, should be `within this width`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `prometheus` file.", + "reference": "how come this is false?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "How about `Object.prototype.toString`? Or using the `typeof` operator?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I know @jzila suggested this, but I disagree: you're really not supposed to save a context in a struct. Can you get by with just saving the `Done()` channel instead? The `ctx` should continue to be passed around explicitly." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "This check isn't right though." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "maybe `toolkitVersion` instead? It doesn't necessarily have to be called that in the generated code, but in the view model classes, I think it makes it clearer that it is the version of toolkit itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "the response data was added intentionally in #612, i think we could keep the `setFileState` stuff here as a special case, at least for now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This isn't really easy to read." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "This line changed due to go formatting. Format was not there earlier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The name \"Without\" in code is a little nebulous. Maybe something more descriptive like TrimPrefix or StripPrefix or WithoutPathPrefix or something like that. (Thoughts?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "is this test in the move tests? I see what you mean then - it works, but I wonder if we won't lose track that it's being tested here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I'm not sure if this wanted to be `json:\"tags\"` (which I'd set in my PR) or `json:\"tag\"` that someone elses PR had set. Given that the rest of the fields had their JSON field name set to the same as the struct field name, I opted for `tags`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I think it would be better to use the `for_fiscal_year` method instead of the `for_fiscal_year` method.", + "reference": "since the logic here and in `Proposal` is exactly the same, do you think it makes sense for us to include it elsewhere? I am not opposed to duplicated code when it makes sense, but the reason I first identified this was that I was looking for code in NCR::WorkOrder that was not specific to Work Orders. Seems like fiscal year logic might be helpful for reporting for other clients. In that case, we'd want this scope on those client data classes as well. Might be wrong to include this in the FiscalYear mixin, but it does seem like it should be outside of Proposal and WorkOrder. Does that make sense?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "there is no static method as a go between -- how does this work?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `store_in` method. I think we should add it to the `store_in` method.", + "reference": "Can you please change the name of this class to be something else?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I think we might prefer generalizing the interface rather than creating an exception. Current design of `h2o_next_token` assumes the input to be a comma-separated list, and allows the caller to specify a different separator when parsing a nested list. As I understand, what we are trying to attain in this PR is to have a way of parsing a flat list of semicolon-separated list. Assuming that is the case, I think it would be better to change the API of the function to accept two separators (i.e. inner and outer), where for our existing use-cases `outer` would be `,`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "why not recycling? I Lru cache now recycling?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "Why it is now called `PaymentVersionV3`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.", + "reference": "changed for debug purpose?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `BaseProvider` class.", + "reference": "@cijothomas I needed a way to set the Exporter.ParentProvider when the Processor's gets set. Internal to SDK though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "Talking through this scenario with @srividyacb and she's wondering if there should also be a check of `(from_trunk && node_based_graph.GetEdgeData(eid).flags.road_classification.IsLinkClass())` as highways with trunk classifications can also have this scenario." + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "where does `master_certname` come from?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The line breaking is unnecessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "why not enable split by space here?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Shouldn't the operator be &&?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I think it would be better to add a `--name=#{snapshot_name}` to the `vagrant_cmd` method.", + "reference": "My best guess is that you want to use host.name in these parts to get the name of the host?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "IMO this edge case handling could remain here, just instead of overwriting the `n.nodeType`, the `makeEdgeType` method of `n` should be called, so `n.nodeType = nodeTypeEdge` -> `n.makeEdge()`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Just wondering... The two kinds of notifications are now quite different (Channel, text, maybe even icon). Would it make sense to extract the auto download notification to a new class instead of handling everything in the existing `notificationManager`? I have not checked if this will lead to a lot of code duplication, though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Do we need to put this on the Call? We only need the API communication between the Encoding and the Transports which is currently done through the Transport.Request. The Call is used by users right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in GenerateAPIKey" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log.L().Fatal(zap.Any(\"cfg\", cfg))", + "reference": "Can you judge the type of error?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Much simpler than a weird and confusing ``convolve`` call!" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Huh, this seems weird to me... Surely the suspenders render was called again in order to get the new `
Hello second 2
` output... Imma take a peak at these tests to understand what's going on" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Since this is just a helper function to create text, perhaps this could live in a helper? I noticed that we have a few other error/message creators in the application controller as well, but I think this type of function should be re-factored to be part of a helper." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Will this mess up parsing the messages by other editors? (vscode, vim...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Style/StringLiterals: Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Why can the pool be null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "It might be good to have a note here: > work-around for issue #7562 allowing us to differentiate presentational lists from interactive lists (such as of size greater 1 and ARIA list boxes). In firefox, this is possible by the presence of a read-only state, even in content editable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `Set` instead of a `Set`.", + "reference": "This set of changes is the one part of this that I'm not completely sure is valid. Can someone look over this to make sure I got the E's right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "There doesn't seem to be a reason to copy this here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "We've avoided including h2o headers in BPF programs because it's a runtime dependency. However, IIRC, this is because h2olog was maintained in the separate repository so that h2olog did not know where h2o was installed. Now h2olog can use `H2O_ROOT`, we should add it to BCC's `cflags` in order to include h2o headers in BPF programs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "I think the docstring here should include the CLI arg `--alert.query-url` just to make it clear to users which setting this uses." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Same change just above?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `async () => await Note.save({ title: 'cyrillic l', body: '\u043b' });`", + "reference": "Could you check the result content rather than just the number of search results please? For example with this test if the search engine suddenly starts returning \"latin n\" for both queries, we won't know about it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `spiffe://example.org/spire/server`", + "reference": "nit: I think that `workloadID` should suffice for this test... that's what we'd be issuing anyways" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Space is too long. [81/80]
Space is too long. [8/80]
Space is too long. [8/80]", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "We should have a rule to detect identical catch branches" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry", + "reference": "remove these from the targets file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "now that we have the signature in the hive messages, it might be that this must be drastically reduced, since there are limits on the protobuf reader/writers i believe" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I recommend that we move this to be optional, as other users might not need it. Can you look at `OPTIONAL_PACKAGES` section, around line 68?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "I usually set idea to never use wildcard import such as `import java.util.*;` Now i use setting from javaslang standard." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/", + "reference": "Where is host['ips'] coming from?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "oh! missed a `:` here; let me fix that; also can get rid of the intermediate variable" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import this in the component.", + "reference": "I'd create a different method for each render section." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Instead of storing the revert flag in the tracer is it possible to use org.hyperledger.besu.ethereum.mainnet.TransactionProcessor.Result#getRevertReason? (via org.hyperledger.besu.ethereum.transaction.TransactionSimulatorResult#getResult)? If a TX reverts without a reason do we get an empty revert reason or a revert reason with zero bytes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "I think this should test with and without container reuse if that is implemented in this PR. Probably just make this test parameterized." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))", + "reference": "These modifications allow BaseFile to translate into a SparkRow with the specID as a column" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "is this something we've been missing this whole time?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "nit: this is a package-wide constant so better to narrow the scope like `allEventsSign`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "There seems to be some repetition. Does a local function make this code shorter overall?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Might be cheaper to reuse the `null` assignment of line 313 and set `isHydrating` to null instead WDYT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Revert this blank line" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This was introduced recently for the Hadoop 3 upgrade. Copy/paste error but definitely causing some of the new test failures." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I think we should only need to do this for `:approve` since we are using `authenticate_user!` for all other actions and that checks for disabled client" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.", + "reference": "I wonder if we should create new tests for header checks; here for instance we're mixing querystring and headers. Thoughts?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We should be able to add sensitive by hard-coding the parameters, same as you put into the metadata in apply_helpers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ShopBundle\\Model\\Order\\ItemFactory` class.", + "reference": "Why do you think that it is necessary to create this class?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "replacing the `1` with `io.SeekCurrent` may be good here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nit: perhaps this file would be better named `jwks_source.go`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It will be helpful to specify the intended priority as well for the properties within this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Make this private and update all the public functions to not take this argument. The variable you set below should also be private, then in the tests instead of passing the variable in to the function just update the variable. We don't want to expose the testing implementation in the public api if it can be avoided." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the file name.", + "reference": "Do you now why is it a specific table name is used as a default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "If all you're doing is checking for the existence of a directory as your \"temp\" directory, why does it matter what OS you're on?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "nit- would be cleaner to import it once" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Looks like there is a closing parenthesis `)` missing here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "this one bothers me. There are many places where this one is written to for an error message and just a single callsite is changed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "You can put this in `kbfsOpsInit()` in you want, so we don't have to call it in every test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "`ARM_32` is what clients define as an input to DR, and is not always defined internally: we use just `ARM` to mean AArch32." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "s/for use/to use for/" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `null`", + "reference": "` $event->getAvatarFilename()` this function return `string` or `null`. In this place ` $event->getAvatarFilename()->getValue()` return `Fatal error `" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "why not creating a new error type for server's own resource limit exceed error and do conversion within rpc interceptor?" + }, + { + "prediction": "???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????", + "reference": "Could be a timing thing here. When options are created they'll copy the ref for the current default propagator. If user sets through SDK the global propagator after that, it won't be reflected. Could leave it null here and then when it is used in instrumentation do `options.Propagator?? Propagators.DefaultTextMapPropagator`. It would be a slight perf hit but it makes it hot-swappable." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Unrelated file. Please remove from PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Careful: you only want two newlines after the final header message. (That indicates the end of headers and the start of data.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "This will not work on Python 3 (to which we are transitioning) because `.content` is bytes, not a str. Can you make the pattern a bytes object as well (like so: `b\"pattern\"`)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it's a good choice.", + "reference": "This was to allow the tests to pass when the order of the required was different. Silly, but we don't have an easy way to check for \"equal but order doesn't matter\" in chai." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.", + "reference": "maybe say \"returns the default cost method that returns an object of cost 1\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.", + "reference": "I believe these rules will be enforced both (1) on egress from a local workload, and (2) on ingress **to** a local workload. Right? I understand that we definitely want (1), but do we really want to enforce (2) as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Use `response.asJsonObject()` instead. Also, use `put()` instead of `putOpt()`, `null` as a value is fine." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Are you sure? We've changed it during an introduction of the IME support." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if the filter is empty or not. I don't think we need to check if the filter is empty or not. I don't think we need to check if the filter is empty or not.", + "reference": "I think here we want the use of `empty()` to take care of empty strings. If you put `dql_filter: ''` in your YAML config... this will add `->andWhere('')` and it will fail, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "this is golang's named return, err is defined, `return` is equivalent to `return err` the current code has no problem" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I don't think this is right; in Rust terms it's like a `&mut String`, in Java `StringBuilder` - it's not a return value from the function which is what `(out)` is for." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` should be `labels` and `labels` and `labels` should be `labels`.", + "reference": "If the label is not binary, should we rename this function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is very-very bad idea because of its performance impact" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "WHY U NOT SORT IMPORTS?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_as` method in the `sign_in_as` method in the `sign_as` method in the `sign_as` method in the `sign_as` method", + "reference": "Put a comma after the last item of a multiline hash." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "How come we need ``Dimensioned`` in the top-level namespace?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "excess whitespace through plugin." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "What is the problem here? I feel we used this in a lot of places." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this restriction should be removed.", + "reference": "Update the docstring." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "delete the empty line \"github.com/pkg/errors\" should be grouped with other third party packages same for the rest" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Assigning capabilities to the field here is not the best idea. Semantically this field contains the capabilities returned by the browser after session start. So here we sould better amend capabilities and return them from `init` method to pass later to `startSession` method (that will assign the capabilities returned by the browser to the field)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Is this a breaking change, or is the API private?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't think we need this dependency in this project right now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice, but I'm not sure if it's a good choice.", + "reference": "I don't think this is necessary since `CommonLabels` is a public func and every component name is also public constant." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "The `_example` field should be updated to include an interpreter with an array value." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Put this in the godoc of SupportedProtocols instead. Preferably we would just use one map though. Why not just use this one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'd feel a little safer if the first argument were a string, not a *string unless there's a particular reason for making it a pointer." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "You can safely revert changes to this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "This deletion is unnecessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I'm not a huge fan of this overloading of the prop; accepting very different types of arguments for props like this can be confusing, and wasn't part of the IB. I understand wanting to import the SVG directly, but the IB suggests using `${global._googlesitekitLegacyData.admin.assetsRoot}${userInputSuccessImage}` as the `src`/`smallImage` value here. It'd be great to refactor this to accept components directly in the future, but let's do that all-at-once rather than this hybrid approach that makes the API less clear." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "I've had this happen recently with IntelliJ, was this intentional?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Order(1) vs Order(logN) -- not sure it's measurable at the ~200 element size of the table. All of the published comparisons start at ~1000 elements." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "I don't know about this aliasing and 'factory'. Previous version was rather straightforward: `location.CreateLocationResolver`. Perhaps `location.CreateResolver` would be even better? What do we actually gain here from moving DI to a separate sub-package?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "Use `UpperCamelCase` for function names" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm not 100% sold on this idea but I like it in general. Nice compromise between using the 'Date' constructor where possible and falling back to the pre #5880 behavior when it makes sense. However, instead of `Number(value) < 0`, let's do `Number(value) < MIN_YEAR` because `new Date('-2017')` is perfectly valid in JS and I don't want to break the date behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "SOLR-11877 we don't know the znode path", + "reference": "Remember to close SOLR-11877 after this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "this change should be reverted" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This function signature is a bit complicated, some parameters are IN type (stopLoop which is modified from outside), others are OUT (registeredEvent channel which is modified inside function) I suggest the following signature -> SubscribeToRegistrationEvent(identityAddress) returns registeredEvent chan of type (RegisteredEvent not int), Unsubscribe func(), error (in case of any error). That way caller can always cance subscription if needed and check for any errors. Also - unsubscribe function hides any internal details how subscribtion is really implemented" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the query to `json`, but I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`.wav`?! cannot we use something slightly more modern and compressed instead? :) I dunno, like `.mp3` or `.aac` or `.ogg`..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Wouldn't a single signal call be enough? (without the boolean even)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I suspect that this whole block, which is going to be repeated a number of times, should probably be in a helper. I guess it would need to be given the object and the title and could probably figure out everything else from that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should we expose this attribute in the Asciidoctor.js API?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I think contains on `Multimap` was broken - it should return true if one of the values is associated with the key? It that right" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?", + "reference": "delete this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Presumably we no longer need `force: true` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "HIP runtime is compiled using a C++ compiler. So comparison to both NULL as well as 0 does not make sense. Just comparing to NULL is sufficient." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I think it would be better to have a `welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome_mailer.welcome", + "reference": "these urls are still in `a` tags so we should probably include these links separately for a non-HTML version" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "That's fine though, meaning that you can send to this channel under the server lock. The internalSendLoop will pick up the change when the server lock is released (if loop is blocked trying to grab the server lock). Even the way you do it here (releasing the lock, sending, then reacquiring) does not guarantee that the internalSendLoop will have time to refresh in that interval." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "The name `enableDownloading` implies this is a boolean capability. How about `downloadDir`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "????????????&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&=&", + "reference": "Found one internal team is using this method. Will coordinate with them about the migration solution." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "The field `HttpServerErrorCodes` should be called `HttpServerErrorStatuses`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this rule to the rules file.", + "reference": "Can you please make each of these in a separate line. It will be easier to keep them sorted, and add/remove." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the `createBaseZnode` method.", + "reference": "should we error instead of silently ignoring the `cleanup` param? it defaults to `false`, so someone must have explicitly set it to `true`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "There is no specific requirement that the root be called `root`, just that there is a single root directory and that it be the first entry in the zip." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "perhaps we should encapsulate this logic in a helper method w a test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Now that we're only using this repo as a Gem you shouldn't need to `require` an expanded local file path like below." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "This isn't necessarily a year. It may be months, days, or hours. Can we return `intValue()` directly instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "this is redundant because it gets logged immediately on entering the handleContainerChange function" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "`ds.GenericDeploymentConfig.DeploymentNotification` in L128 is nullable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Client` class.", + "reference": "this shouldn't be exposed here - this class isn't a carriage for this - its used internally to determine if/how we can mine." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "It's fine to leave these checks in. It'll make the exception come from `FirefoxDriver`, and that's probably clearer to a user." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the config file.", + "reference": "We don't want to include the `IntegrationSpecHelper` for models...mind moving this line out of the loop to be `config.include EnvironmentSpecHelper, type: :model`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `TestWriteDrupalConfig`.", + "reference": "Please check the return on these." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we need `==` for true?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Changing the default value may cause BC-breaking. Suggest changing this value in config." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "how does that happen?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This is gross/clever. :-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Take a look at the name of this file. Definitely copy and" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you check with @mahebbar how to work this error. Should be different from 404." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good fix, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Do we still need the upper bound `<3.9`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `dirname(__DIR__, 3). DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR. 'psalm') || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar::running(false)) || realpath($input_path) === realpath(Phar", + "reference": "Does this mean `vendor/bin/psalm` is not a symlink (or whatever equivalent Windows has for symlinks) on Windows?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "@lpabon having a separate package name `aws_test` allows to test the package as if the tester was an external package. If the test package name is the same as the package being tested, the test package can also use methods and variables not exposed to the eventual user." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "The exporter should still be able to test these histogram instrument kinds, right? Is there another reason to remove these?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "should this increment eval.Round somehow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Although this change looks good. Maybe there are other inconsistent cases too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This is a way better method name." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should redirect to the home page.", + "reference": "Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "I was wondering if this should allow per role specification, instead of (or in addition to) a generic \"allowed everywhere\". So you could do: `{ separator: ['aria-valuenow', 'aria-valuemin', 'aria-valuemax'] }`. You could still allow the array, and you could add a wildcard option for the \"generic\" case you've got now: `{ '*': ['always-allowed'] }`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I'm confused by the name. The string was a Hive string but it isn't any longer? Why should we care? (I imagine I'll find the answer later... there is some different semantic that we want downstream...)" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Could you please leave the explicit imports?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why need alias?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this be a `libfs.nullIDGetter` (exported, of course)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I dislike the messages.go pattern; the strings are only used once and make more sense in context. The other two added reportErrorf() calls in clerk.go have inline strings." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))((((((((((((----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Seems we don't need it anymore." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [8/7/", + "reference": "This might cause problems with the weird way we publish Guidance and Groups in the UI. We will have to make sure that UAT is thorough." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the pipeline.", + "reference": "this default needs to be on order 1 minute, I'm not sure why we defaulted to 1 hour below..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I figure to make `{env.*}` work, right? I can't think of any other placeholder that makes sense here" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Why change the port from 0 to getAvailablePort()?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "For me would be great don't repeat timeout sending in every get_locator call. Looks like it should be sent into LocatorsManager init. And possibly it should me non mandatory, something like that: `def __init__ (self, locators, timeout=60):`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do that.", + "reference": "I feel like since now we don't initiate the `opts.projectName` with `opts.ProjectName()`, which means `opts.projectName` and `opts.ProjectName()` they don't necessarily equal to each other, we need to also substitute all usage of `opts.ProjectName()` within `Ask()`, `Validate()`, and `Execute()` to `opts.projectName`. Otherwise if `-p` is set, `opts.ProjectName()` will get expired." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "why do we thinkg that an empty string is ok to return from this method? I think the null should never be passed in here in the first place" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "nit: can remove this `else` since we return from the condition above." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "You missed `Write(...)`! I'm kidding ofc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to update_next_payment_information_for_subscription.", + "reference": "Was there a customer who had this set to an empty string?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I know we have the `reporter` spec below, but what about a unit test for this to explain reasoning behind logic? If I were going to update this decorator, I would assume it wasn't covered by tests because there is no unit test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "it's better to be : void attach(String name, Part part);" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "I didn't see where the IOException can get thrown, is this just to match the V1 reader?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "We normally suppress this warning with `RDUSED_PARAM(forceRDKit)`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "What if `Game::getPlayerByNameWildcard` had not been called before. It would not find a player, wouldn't it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Why upper case \"R\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()` or `buildRequired()`)", + "reference": "Does this need to return an error or could it return `false, nil`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Can you not change those scopes in public API classes? This applies here and in other places -- protected changed to package-scope for source is not really an API-compatible change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "this parameter is only used in POST, please use `getRequest()->request->get('...');` Thanks" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Problem number 1: Scoped packages would have a `/` character here. Changing this to `validatePackage` resolves the 403." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't quite get why there would be key errors: ``deep_mapped`` is a clone of ``self`` and ``k`` comes from ``self.items()`` so why would the key ever be rejected?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "this chain ID determines only from which chain to withdraw, therefore your changes do not accomplish what you want them to accomplish. You'll need changes to `func (aps *hermesPromiseSettler) Withdraw(chainID int64, providerID identity.Identity, hermesID, beneficiary common.Address) error`. The method probably has to include two chain ids: to and from. Currently, the method internally uses: `aps.config.L1ChainID` -> the chain to withdraw to `chainID` -> the chainID that was passed as the chain that the withdrawal is originating from." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "If instead we had `TraceContext.extract` return a bool value as a second return value, we could avoid the byte array comparison in `TraceID.IsValid`. Did you consider that alternative?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "here shouldn't we use `depotFreeLimit`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Could we use the Rails application's secret token instead? Do we actually need our own here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "we can't use column name/names as a parameter` for `SeriesGroupBy`.", + "reference": "so should be fixed here also" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I would just remove this assert as it's going to get un-maintainable with a long list of valid sizes. Ditto below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`HostDataDir` is misleading. Can we rename it to something more relevant? The constant should also be moved up and reused as necessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "I still feel like we are double-counting the outer IP header here (once in `defaultMTUGRE` and once in `ipsecESPOverhead`) but I'm not that familiar with IPsec." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `MeasureProcessor` class.", + "reference": "Not sure what benefit we gain by extending BaseProcessor here, as this seems to be defining a new OnEnd method. Could we modify MeasurementItem to have all the things, and then MeasurementProcessor can be simply extending BaseProcessor (not blocking. just noting some observations in the PR :) )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This change was not really intended but made by the linter of VS Code. And looking at other packages this looks like a best practise to place interal packages on the top and gh imports afterwards." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This seems like a more appropriate message under `ListenAndServe`. WDYT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.", + "reference": "Is this not required?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "We should start thinking of an object that encapsulates this information :) we might need more arguments in the future." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this work? I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "Given that we are (conceptually) searching across multiple self-dependencies, all we can say is that we didn't have a self dependency in which *both* source and dest masks were correct. Since the spec doesn't imagine this case, the valid usage statement assume we can differentiate only wrong source from only wrong dest within a *single* self-dependency -- which we can't across multiple (at least not meaningfully)... so we always return both the source/dest VUID's if we can't find a self-dependency in with *both* are correct." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "rename? MiningCoordinator always exists" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Here would be the same case you don't need to call `loadConfigs`, but you would need to reread configs using `getConfig` on each getHost function call, not once per file." + }, + { + "prediction": "IsDeleteOnClose() is not a good idea?", + "reference": "Unlocking with defer means that this lock is still held curing the call to forgetNode(), below, which I see attempts to acquire `f.mu`, which looks dangerous to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Does anyone still use the cst out of this method? If not consider deleting" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should redirect to `https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMBhumlUP-A` if we don't want to redirect to `https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMBhumlUP-A`", + "reference": "Line is too long. [97/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This seems unused." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "@luguanglong, Thanks for the fix, can you re-phrase it to sound better something like \"This OS version is currently un-supported by keadm\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "should probably be called `_DeleteFpInfoAttr` because it removes it. Cleaning gives the impression it is still there. I would also move this to the end of the function `GetAtomicWeightsForFingerprint`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `ValidatePipelineBindPoint` function.", + "reference": "nit, can we use `VK_PIPELINE_BIND_POINT_RAY_TRACING_KHR` here (granted it isn't else where, maybe worth fixing here or in separate PR)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the `exercise_parameters` to the `exercise_parameters` method.", + "reference": "This will need to be updated in the upcase-exercises repo as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Think it's worth extracting this to `Exercise#complete?`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "This is still a potentially useful public method - should we remove such methods?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "I don't understand this change, what is happening here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a bug or a bug?", + "reference": "I think its worth stating this is `versionMajor`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "rebuild: say loads and merges" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why was this removed here (also in the other file)? Shouldn't we import them so that the reference in the docs below is interpreted correctly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I'd prefer to have a blank line between the class declaration and its first member. Is it possible?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is it really LEGACY_HELLO if we are using the most up to date HELLO? Perhaps `MONGOS_HELLO` would work here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))/((((()))/(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((/(/(/(//////////////", + "reference": "I am afraid this is going to cause problems on Windows where it is not uncommon to have injected threads (CTRL_SHUTDOWN, CTRL_LOGOFF, etc.) we have no privileges to suspend -- and thus retrying will just fail again, and with the new \"synchall failure is fatal and should kill the process\" approach it turns what used to work for us on Windows into process death." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "think it should only be in create_dist" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "Do you plan to support Pod spec change? Like hostPort is added/removed later after Pod creation?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Is this behavior correct? It used to return `true`, which should map to `dokan.ExistingDir`. Was that previously a bug?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.", + "reference": "What about just printing an empty list in this case? That would make the output more predictable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I looked and couldn't find any usage of `container` in any of the editor component files (js or hbs), so I assume this was used once and didn't get removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `templates/searchform.php` file.", + "reference": "I just updated a number of sites using older versions of Roots onto WP 3.6 and this little function change was required. Multiple search bars were displaying when I used the search widget in a widgetized sidebar. Updated the roots_get_search_form as seen in this change resolved it for me!" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Fixes test failed in some cases" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to remove this once ads catalog moves to the prod environment. I don't think we should remove this once ads catalog moves to the prod environment.", + "reference": "what's the prod url for this? just curious. @amirsaber" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Can you please change this to azkaban.jobs.java.opts?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Here is another concatenation which should be updated. Even though `Source:` and the link are essentially separate, it isn't RTL friendly. This would be another good use for `createInterpolateElement` I think so that we wouldn't need to include all of the classnames in the translation string (or extract them to a placeholder). That would allow us to use the `Link` component as well, rather than using its resulting HTML as a string which will be a pain to maintain if we were to make changes to the base `Link` component." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I would add an overload `GetCancelledZeroTask()` which calls `GetCancelledZeroTask(CancellationToken.None)`. This is cleaner than requiring the caller to pass `default(CancellationToken)` or `CancellationToken.None`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Would it be equivalent to check if `chain!= nullptr` below? Not suggesting a change, just curious." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "Should probably do `auto this_l (shared_from_this ());` and pass/use that instead of `this`. Same a few other places. IOW, replace both `shared_from_this()` and `this` with `this_l`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the message here.", + "reference": "And here. Please, use `'` for apostrophes in changed strings in this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "assignments should only be cuddled with other assignments (from `wsl`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Please move this to `block_types.go`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "So this is not needed anymore for all attributes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Happy to get suggestion for better messaging here. Here's what I intended to convey: Something is wrong - the Exception is a hint to what might be the cause The impact of that - tracing wont work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move to es_starter.py?", + "reference": "I think we can remove this function, right? (duplicate with `ses_starter.py`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this in the future?", + "reference": "With this fix, I am not even sure we need to overwrite this function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to True.", + "reference": "Why not just import this from `data_transfer`? As a rule copying the same code twice is not a good idea. Also: please run `pylint` on all files in this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "You've got an absolute path here referencing your home dir :-)." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Maybe I should do some sorting so that these properties don't keep moving around..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Can we keep this test anyway, as it's part of the spec?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into a separate module.", + "reference": "Can be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It's a minor quibble I know, but I like having the imports ordered by lengt" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the charset here.", + "reference": "It's better to get the charset from context or other setting to let the user override it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "this filename as well needs change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we want to remove `omitempty` here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "You cannot move this here because it breaks detach. Just call `tty.Close()` before returning the error from start" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `context` here.", + "reference": "I updated only the implicit roles who needed a update for this new rule to validate." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "> // Code generated by protoc-gen-go. DO NOT EDIT." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `map[string]string` instead of a `map[string]string`", + "reference": "minor: skipOSConfigMetadata, otherwise, the name sounds like a boolean" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid type?", + "reference": "~~I think lines 65-67 should be moved into this else clause after `type =...` Else, it is a bit confusing why we check the enclose type validity a second time~~ Nevermind, will do some refactoring, myself. But thanks for \"fixing\" this!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`sessions := endpoints.SessionsDTO{}` and using only `sessions` should be simpler." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "These need to be in the other order to avoid crashing when dcontext == GLOBAL_DCONTEXT (==-1)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Why not change the other samples?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Indentation is mixed up here due to spaces/tabs, I'm guessing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate file.", + "reference": "Should we provide a little more context in the error message? Maybe throw in something about what operation was being performed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `array_key_exists('settings', $configuration)`", + "reference": "Project standard is spaces, not tabs. Please fix and then we can merge this." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "@hgtw is there anything we're worried about with regards to using this cache? Do we want to do staged testing around expeditions before we merge? Curious your thoughts here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "The purpose of this was to allow pushing filters into the manifest files if we ever use a format other than Parquet. I think overall this is a good change because we can add it back later. Just wanted to note why the unused argument was there." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think BSON::Decimal128 should always be serialized as Decimal128 regardless of config option." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "We should probably just move the `require 'bolt/plan_creator'` in `Bolt::CLI` to `Bolt::Application` so it will already be loaded." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": ">20 [](start = 45, length = 2) Can we override this at runtime? Maybe it should be a command line option with default." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.", + "reference": "can just remove it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Better call it `CleanUpMirrorInfo`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the node.StorageProtocol.RetrievalProtocol.RetrievalProvider.Start()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()", + "reference": "@shannonwells is there still something missing here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This could be more indicative of what it is... e.g... `stresstest_time_limit`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))", + "reference": "Shouldn't we do a `reader_payload_pool_.reset()` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'd prefer the nomenclature less tightly coupled to DRAND throughout. I played with renaming the `drand` package to `beacon` but it was too much noise in this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a property.", + "reference": "I think I would prefer you declare `self._current_key=None` in the constructor and just return `self._current_key`. That way you can prevent anyone from overwriting `current_key` without needing to use `getattr` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in `fromCSVSignature`.", + "reference": "I guess I like the name `mode` okay. I can't think of anything better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a timeout to the workflow.", + "reference": "I would create a new method (NewStepWithDefaultTimeout?) for this purpose because timeout<=0 looks like a hidden logic" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `limit`", + "reference": "Are these limit changes related?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Don't you mean `import scapy.consts`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in rollbackPrimary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This is not what title says." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top.", + "reference": "a fix applies several fixes? maybe this should simply be `applyToNode`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "U1000: func `fakeGetOk` is unused (from `unused`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the error to the error message.", + "reference": "Because there is a \"k8s.io/client-go/tools/cache\" below, we can sort out all the \"imports\" here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Nit should be using `goimports` to format the import statements with standard libary imports first, new line, followed by non-standard library imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Do we not have tests for pipeline delete" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Good that you mention this constraint in the docstring :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "remove this blank?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Partitions is misspelled 8 times in this commit, might make sense to fix the spelling for all of those." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import `qutescheme`.", + "reference": "Please remove this blank line - those are only used to group Python/third-party/qutebrowser imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "`insecure` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Same as above (HTTP in upper-case)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This is getting repetitive maybe you could introduce an abstract test case with a `getExpectedUrl($providerReference)` method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I do not think returning `Value{}` is correct here. For example, `reflect.MakeFunc(...).Kind()` would return `reflect.Invalid` instead of `reflect.Func`. Therefore, I think this should panic instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Does this work for Custom Elements? iirc we're lacking test cases for them. /cc @andrewiggins @developit" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Same change just above?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I suppose `apploader.js` isn't used by WebWorkers. So `self` will always be `window` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Since this var is no longer defined we should remove the `if skip_targets.any?` bit below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "I think we should `return arn` as a fallback at the end of this function (otherwise the `['Resource']` entry below could become `None`)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Why session is started at all, if you need to shut it down e.g. DI should launch noopSession" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: can we rename the interface to `wsFileDeleter`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why target cannot be external endpoints?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `CollectionAdminParams` interface.", + "reference": "We use a suffix \".AUTOCREATED\" for configsets, maybe we can use the same here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `OpenTelemetrySdk.EnableOpenTelemetry` method.", + "reference": "This one won't be disposed. Should be (something like) `using var openTelemetry = OpenTelemetrySdk.EnableOpenTelemetry(` no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why this is in the diff?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `CloudBackupGroupCreate` interface.", + "reference": "How is status determined? When the user calls CloudBackupCreate( src_volume_id ) they can then call CloudBackupStatus( src_volume_id ) Is there something similar for this new API?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "We could pass `excessDomChildren` to `options._catchError` and only do this if an error-boundary catches the error. Not entirely sure if that's better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `array_values($this->getFilters())`", + "reference": "In php8 named parameters were introduced and now it is required to match called method parameter name when setting parameters by array destructing or call_user_func_array() etc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return the context.", + "reference": "If instead we had `B3.extractSingleHeader` and `B3.extract` return a bool value as a second return value, we could avoid the byte array comparison in `TraceID.IsValid`. Did you consider that alternative?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think this is more of a semantic difference than a typo - `weiter hinzufgen` is like `continue adding` whereas `weitere hinzufgen` is like `add more`. I think it makes sense to change it though" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.", + "reference": "nit: 200 is superfluous" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This is testing `unreserved keyword`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the name of the method.", + "reference": "paramsNatOrigin doesn't include sUVtoST. I would just remove that definition for now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the test in a separate PR.", + "reference": "It feels like the test should be waiting for the prefetcher to shut down, but I don't have a great reason why other than that it might be confusing for debugging if there are still goroutines from old prefetchers lying. But I guess since `TogglePrefetcher(false)` doesn't actually set the prefetcher to nil, the queue shutdown method will still end up waiting for the shutdown to finish. If that sounds right, nevermind me." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "As a long term thing, would it make sense to move the resource names as keys under the requirements map?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "That doesn't fix the whole problem. The issue lays in this line right here, not the one above. There are two problems with this line: 1. It finds things that aren't cells in the table 2. if it doesn't find anything, it shouldn't return empty here, but continue down to look for row/ column headers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I am pretty sure that this is infinite recursion as getAllProjects returns the project itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a list of categories.", + "reference": "Something I didn't catch before I merged this PR, is the hyphenated constant a problem? E.g. should \"data-lists\" be \"data_lists\"? @paulkaplan" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Can you write the test as `if not (conf.use_winpcapy or conf.use_pcap or conf.use_dnet):`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `RepositoryDefinition` class.", + "reference": "we have to include foreign assets on the repository directly because they don't belong to a job? This seems very awkward... Is this a step towards the job-less assets on the repository? Did you consider having `build_asset_job` take in a set of foreign assets instead? I suppose we would then need to subclass it to be a more special `AssetJobDefinition` that can keep track of them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "`-Wstringop-truncation` is a new kind of error detector introduced in GCC 8. As for this patch, these are two false-positives though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can we port this error msg to v2 too? This one is better, as it explicitly states what sources are allowed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The convention so far has been to require directly from the defining file (in this case `../../read_preference'). I think the concern has been mostly about the potential for circular dependency cycles" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I suggest expanding dims here to simplify the formatting." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why do you need to specify the kinto prefix here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The `!r` is unnecessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I didn't see existing tests for this `OpenBucketURL`. Not sure if it's easy to do without mocking these `opener` calls." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Should we default to `true`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the README.md file.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't these options also include `@babel/preset-env`? Also I see you set `babelrc` to `false`, could we rely on our existing `.babelrc` file? Feels like some duplicate configuration otherwise." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we're not logging. I'm not sure why we're not logging.", + "reference": "Nit: We can use `%s` since `disconnectReason` is a string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it's better to create a new example" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "The stages are correct, but the more forgiving `kAttachmentRasterOrder` should be used, based on a review of the spec. That should give the same effect of suppressing the false positive conflict between the DEPTH R/W and resolve. > End-of-subpass multisample resolves are treated as color attachment writes for the purposes of synchronization. This applies to resolve operations for both color and depth/stencil attachments. That is, they are considered to execute in the VK_PIPELINE_STAGE_COLOR_ATTACHMENT_OUTPUT_BIT pipeline stage and their writes are synchronized with VK_ACCESS_COLOR_ATTACHMENT_WRITE_BIT. Synchronization between rendering within a subpass and any resolve operations at the end of the subpass occurs automatically, without need for explicit dependencies or pipeline barriers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "To be consistent, I think it should actually just be a single `-`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "this seems extraneous." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Ah, I see here that 'LongDomain' is defined as something that contains a subdomain segment that is `maxLengthOfDomainSegment` long (which I think is 63 characters) - I don't think any public ACME servers/Let's Encrypt's staging environment has a restriction on this? if it does, and the 'pebble' based ACME server does not, then Pebble needs modifying to also fail in these cases as it aims to replicate the ACME RFC as closely as possible" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "I think you need `-y` here to prevent a user confirmation prompt" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))((((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Repeating: I don't think this should be a core-wide global var. This should be isolated to arch/x86 or at least arch/, maybe inside getter/setters as mentioned above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "right URL is like in cmdrunner, using search.maven.org" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "The link to valid syntax is not really applicable for NET2_1, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't it be more specific, like \"gcppubsub supports all UTF-8 strings\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.", + "reference": "Everything in this class is SolrCloud-related, not legacy replication" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););;;;;;);););););););););););););;;;;;;););););););););););););;;;;;;;;););););););););););););;;;;;;;;);););););););););););;;;;;;;);););););););););););;;;;;;););););););););;;;;;;;;;;;;;););););", + "reference": "Could just assign directly and eliminate the `newval` var." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "... with the name of the affected package, or \"all\", followed by a colon,..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "We'll want to remove this one if we make the assembly version constant." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));", + "reference": "Can we have a single function here that uses the same subscribers and just changes meta based on context?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "where would ` static startup_kernel_loader skl;` be instantiated? if it's not instantiated anywhere should this be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "I think we should move those util functions that work with drag-drop to @uppy/utils, so they can be shared (maybe later) with drag-drop plugin? Otherwise it will continue to depend on drag-drop module." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Migrate the spec.Labels to locator.Labels?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "The test case already existed but it never tested properly because of the conditional in the test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I'm okay with this, but I don't see a lot of benefit to removing unnecessary parens. If extra parens make something more readable (like this) or clarify order of operations even when matching the default, I would say we should keep them." + }, + { + "prediction": "Why is this needed?", + "reference": "@sarowe why was this volatile? It's fishy to see this as the only volatile field." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a new version.", + "reference": "template is not correct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Rename the registies to `BBOX_ASSIGNERS` and `BBOX_SAMPLERS` to avoid ambiguity. There is also a registry for dataset sampler." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This is no longer stubbed on every test. Perhaps it should be, and should be unstubbed in the single case that it matters." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This seems much simpler! I'm not sure I follow what you mean by the threading part... Also tests are not liking this constant. Might need a require or to fully qualify this." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Convention is \"FIXME: i#2144\" or \"XXX: i#2144\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This should probably be a property instead of a method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "do we need to consider setting the `state` as well? If so, lot of changes might be required, like, setting to 'Reconciling' in upgrade code, setting to 'error' or'reconciled' in volumeReconciler functions." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Space inside { missing.
Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [82/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Add blank line below license header." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "I'm not clear on whether this really should be the right behavior. Basically we're saying that a replace table will keep the existing location (as opposed to using defaults). I suspect we don't have create or replace with location semantics, but this is making some assumptions that a replacement is somehow the same as the old. If we were to go with id based pathing convention, this wouldn't work. I don't think this is an issue at this point, but it might make sense to push this down to the location provider." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "Just run a global replacement for all `executionproto`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "@AutomatedTester @davehunt thoughts on a new keyword argument?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid error, but I don't think it's a valid error.", + "reference": "Should line 47 be OPAE_ERR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Not necessary, just write `time.Time{}`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "As these two strings simply get concatenated for the docs, there's a space missing after the dot here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `IntegrationOptions` and the `RecordTelemetry` method.", + "reference": "What about integrations where we don't plug ourselved on OnMethodBegin?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "shouldn't **call** return a boolean?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "ViewModel classes should not expose any classes from framework.model." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "how would you feel about keeping these tests to be more explicit and having them `assert not _validate...`? or is your view that that is too duplicative of the tests in `test_evaluator.py`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "Why do we use the `winrm_nodes` variable here and not the string `\"winrm_nodes\"` as we were using before?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "why update Copyright?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Does this mean we cannot update statistics with sampling on a table with LOB columns?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "Look good, but I think a `[flags]` enum would be more future proof? Although i'm not sure if a flags-enum is working from the XML config. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Since I believe state will never be anything other than 'expanded' or collapse, you can rewrite this as follows: `return row.treeNode.state === 'expanded'? 'ui-grid-icon-minus-squared' : 'ui-grid-icon-plus-squared'; `" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "the latter part can go but isn't the first part of this still sound -- that we assume \"id\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why is the escaping of @ and $ removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Nit: `Http` is redundant in this interface's name." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "what if I set SynchronizableEntitiesPrefix to \"a/b/c/d\" in config?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: This error message doesn't mention that the path is a directory, maybe \"Dockerfile path is a directory:%s, please provide path to file.\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "This is done automatically, you can skip it next time ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an exception here.", + "reference": "This is needed in `set_value` because of `:open-editor` (you could open an editor, close the tab, then close the editor). I don't think it makes any sense to have it here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Perhaps we can assume that profiling is enabled if ProfilingPort is set? And/or configure a default port and frequency, so we don't have to set three config vars every time?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a check to ensure that we have box_url #generate the VagrantFile v_file = \"Vagrant.configure(\\\"2\\\") v_file << \"c.ssh.forward_agent = true\\n\" unless options['forward_ssh_agent'].nil? hosts.each do |host| host['ip'] ||= randip #use the existing ip, otherwise default to a random ip v_file << \"c.vm.define '#{host.name}' #use the existing ip, otherwise default to a random ip v_file << \"c.vm.define '#{host.name}' #use the existing ip, otherwise default to a random ip v_file << \"c.vm.define '#{host.name}' #use the existing ip, otherwise default to a random ip v_file << \"c.vm.define '#{host.name}' #use the existing ip, otherwise default to a random ip v_file << \"c.vm.define '#{host.name}' #use the existing ip, otherwise default to a random ip v_file << \"c.vm.vm.define '#{host.name}' #use the existing", + "reference": "This nil check won't correctly handle the case where forward_ssh_agent is set to false - it won't be nil but it should still not be set." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new event.", + "reference": "We could avoid passing proto since threshold isn't needed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This route excluding needed for reconnect only when one connection is lost and we trying to establish another. I was thinking to make 2 separate flags for killswitch and reconnect enabling. This way we can keep killswitch working, but we don't need these routes excluded." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "why can this modification avoid crash?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should redirect to disabled_account_url(account)", + "reference": "This looks good -- signing out the user if the current user is disabled" + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set a set", + "reference": "The line exceeds 120 characters." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a string, not a string.", + "reference": "Let's go ahead and change \"Site\" to \"Project\", since that's the path we've chosen. One less thing to alter in the other issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "I am for this change iff we are sure the information is no longer helpful. I think this could still be valuable for certain scenarios, wbu?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I thought we decided on using the latest active version and not the one which is max ramped up." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "can we update this to a `log.Warningf`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "can we get something emitted in the logs on non-zero exits to trace back to for problems like this failing on the first invocation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Do we need `schema manager` at here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This won't work because of the permissions on the directory when this is included as a library. But, we may be able to do this. The key would be wrapping this command with either a script or a go binary that ensures the current directory is writable. If the current directory is not writable, it would attempt to make it writable so that we could write out the produced binary. But I'm not sure if that will influence the hash that gets produced for `go.sum` since I am not sure how that is calculated. Alternatively, we can choose a place in `/usr/local` or choose a location that is writable in the go cache and use that. I'll give that a try since it might be needed for the ARM builds if we choose to only include `x86_64` precompiled binaries in the module." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this necessary? Why not just use the value returned by `interpreter.Eval` and not mess with the scope? `interpreter.Eval` will return any produced side effects. This means TableObjects as well as any value resulting from any expression statements." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This service is global per namespace, not per Alertmanager/Prometheus/ThanosRuler instance. So this approach won't work. But maybe I missing out something, can you describe your use case here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Do we need this default? Since we aren't using a sql.NullBool or *bool, an unset column will be interpreted as `false` already... We don't set a default on our other bool fields (e.g. entry admin and downstream columns)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "thanks for moving these over. makes more sense for them to be in the exports_helper" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import the keyconf from qutebrowser.config.parsers", + "reference": "That import now isn't needed anymore" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a parameter.", + "reference": "Can you update the `Usage` to be an absolute path as well? Something like `/path/to/firebug.xpi`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This class is missing the `MvxPlugin` attribute" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `wx.GetApp().SetTopWindow(wx.GetApp().SetTopWindow(wx.GetApp().SetTopWindow(wx.GetApp().SetTopWindow(wx.GetApp)))`", + "reference": "What if `wxLang` is returned `None` from `getWxLang`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error", + "reference": "Please don't do changing like this unless it _**really**_ cares. BTW. Please look around to infer our naming conventions." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this test test environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment", + "reference": "This is in test code: understanding what we're doing is important in this context." + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't need this.", + "reference": "prob should still have an example that has multiple option names even if you have to make it up. Or maybe we don't need this method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to render the page.", + "reference": "I believe respond_to whitelists the formats passed to the block so if we don't want to display html, we can just remove the line format.html..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "stylistic nitpick: I _feel_ like we've largely shown errors like this as \"error: \" vs. \"error=\". IMO colon/space reads better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We could put this implementation in `RTPSWriter::create_change_pool` and avoid an extra function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "should this file ends with _test.go?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "It's because of this change. `ss` was unused and it made sense in the program. However I haven't read the IPv6 RFC so I'm unsure of what it does" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "\"Flatten\" is a verb, so I'd probably go with `flattenedIndex` as a variable name here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the server and move it to the server.", + "reference": "If it can only be called once, perhaps a more appropriate name is something like `setMaskables`? `addX` sounds like you can add many `X`es by calling it many times" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Nodecfg should be downloading from a private bucket -- these shouldn't be for public consumption. In general these should be generic and expect environment to provide appropriate credentials and bucket." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is a good file, but I think it should be a good file.", + "reference": "Could you please end the file with an empty line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.", + "reference": "This is an incorrect change. The dialect spoken is an important part of the handshake and should be communicated to users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can this be non-exported to avoid direct use? It would be a breaking change but using previous package version would work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Nit: this is just `return gcerrors.Code(err)`, isn't it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need to wait for at least 5 blocks to be mined before giving up.", + "reference": "I don't know where this came from, but it's not a good idea. This is actually timing out after 5 rounds, not 5 blocks. 5 consecutive null blocks won't be that uncommon. Also when testing with a short block time, this is a very short duration that can contribute to flaky tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "In Python 3 when pickling or unpickling objects, the file needs to be opened as binary so that no text encoding/decoding takes place. So for any open calls around pickle loads or dumps, the mode for reading must be rb and the mode for writing must be wb." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "did you remove **params.qstring.method** intentionally? if so why?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?", + "reference": "What is the current default? Is that inconsistent across uses and that's why this is null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why did we make this change? How come it wasn't an issue before" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error error error error error error error error error error", + "reference": "Can you tighten scope by moving to of these variables? i.e. Move to ~4372?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to keep it in a separate file.", + "reference": "Nice to see this `dataverse.rserve.password` fix rolled in." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to use strlen_s(tmp_optarg, sizeof(tmp_optarg)))", + "reference": "How about the following faster alternative that doesn't need `strlen()` at all: if (*tmp_optarg == '\\0' || *endptr!= '\\0') { fprintf(...)... This would treat the bus argument as invalid if it's either empty (`tmp_optarg` points to '\\0') or invalid (`endptr` points to something other that a '\\0'). Actually, the existing code would accept an empty argument and set the bus to `0`, so if (*endptr!= '\\0') { fprintf(...)... would be enough. The check for an empty argument doesn't hurt, though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I could be missing something here, but the `from` and `cc` are the same. On the test email sent to gatewaycommunicator, these values are different." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))", + "reference": "I'm honestly scared because act is now a hard requirement for useEffect which it wasn't before... This could break some tests :(" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Could use election from `info_a.election`, or is this deliberate?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "looks like this should be `return array(LegacyFormHelper::getType('form'));`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `assert(typeof opt_port!== 'function', not port (mocha callback)));", + "reference": "Maybe it would simpler to ignore opt_port if type!== 'number'?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))()))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Where was `name` being declared before?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: use `corev1.ConditionUnknown`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "You also need to add a similar check on line 992, there's another place where we check `length === 24`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think there is a way to avoid this.", + "reference": "nit: can extract the voteProvider as a local variable" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(end))))", + "reference": "[0] Not suggesting you change it here, but....kindof weird that there's just not an `assertFuncNotEquals`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "why are we passing'registryAddress' here? We probably should construct it together with bc. Registry is not something that change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "`.` at the end of the sentence" + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a)", + "reference": "wouldn't it be useful to split this into an error metric for the timing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Not sure if this is good enough. Each generator will have it's own unit test anyway. Ideally, I think I'd want to test that each generator in the yml is actually a valid generator..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "line is 138 characters" + }, + { + "prediction": "The second return value is a Wire cleanup. The second return value is a Wire cleanup.", + "reference": "Nit: I would leave `Wire` out of the description; if you use this without wire you can still use it." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Nit: each field can be on a separate line to make it visually easier to read." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Do we still have these files? Shouldn't we remove these?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "A lot of things to do with constants seemed to move since the original commit, so I stuck this here, Is there a better place for it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "is 10 too small compared to 1000? consider sync chan is unicast only (vs block chan is broadcast + unicast), i would say use 200~400 for BlockSyncChanSize my concern is that this would potentially slowdown sync speed of full-node" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "A full parse of the plan here on listing the plans will be expensive from both a computation and IO perspective." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `UART_TX_PIN` or `UART_RX_PIN`", + "reference": "These constants use the `_PIN` suffix, while the other constants don't use it. I'm not sure what is best, but I would prefer to keep this consistent. Do you have an opinion on which it should be (with or without suffix)?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Hmm... this feels like discovery should come first. perhaps `--discovery-dns-url`? @NicolasMassart any opinions on this or ideas on who it should be run by?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "why is this needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I wonder if it'd be possible to autogenerate a key from the name within this function if one is not provided explicitly, rather than having all the callsites pass both the name and key (and usually as the same value)? Might give us a good place to implement a `name->key` function that isn't 1:1." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "@adriancole I do not see a change in the thrift file. Are there unit tests verifying that this manual serialization is compatible with the native Thrift serialization done by classes generated from `.thrift` IDL file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "spelling (variable name, all three changes)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "I believe you meant \"specify `desiredUID` and `desiredRole`\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Please follow the import style, move it to its similar group" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we really need these? This is expanding on an API that we're about to do work on with the error stuff @kriskowal" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "passwordModificationTime is no longer used - did the change drop a time check that should be restored? Or should the param get dropped from the methods?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Would it break here without trim? If so, can we do trim in Startup.cs so we don't need to add this code to every parser?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Since we're using Logrus, probably best to use `Infof` to avoid confusion (Logrus' Printf behaves differently to the built in one)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Hm, this looks like a change that should go upstream as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "let's keep ActionByActionHash and delete getActionByActionHash" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ProductVisibility` class.", + "reference": "please use return type" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendend))))))))))))))));));));endendendendendendendend).).).).).).).).).).).).endendendendendendend).).).).).endendendendendend).).).).).endendendendendendendend).).).).endendendendendendendendendend).).).endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));));));));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend", + "reference": "This is deliberately at this level." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'm going to go ahead and undo this change, I don't think it was intentional." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "> specialised This isn't a typo in my neck of the woods" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "will change to `storage_target`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "This would be better as `cls.securitycenter_client`, to match what is being instantiated." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(false)(false))))))(false))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Could we have this initialization as part of the initialize method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `editController` method.", + "reference": "This line should be removed as editController is not used from this context anymore." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "This is correct in concept but the method signature doesn't really communicate the same thing. In other words, if the function produces an output table where is it? Its not on the function signature. Can you explain where the output table is created?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "For insurance, it's best not to take it directly" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "change 'value' to keysToSend, here and in other references in this commit. 'value' implies the user is getting the value of the element, rather than just the keys we're sending to it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to save the task.", + "reference": "is the plan to fully migrate to boltdb and then remove the state save here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This should be `output.colorBright`. Unless I'm missing some reason for adding a new theme variable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: I wonder if these should be moved down to where version is defined, just to keep them all in the same place." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "Is this supported by every implementation of Java (and Android)? Should it be conditional upon `gen_nullable`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "@briri Thanks! I just caught this too updating my feature branch" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not log log log log log log log.", + "reference": "I think you should move this block (and the `envpw := os.Getenv(\"RCLONE_CONFIG_PASS\")`) right to the start of the function, then we can remove the duplicate code below" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this only to set the node to draining? I think we can do that inside `Before` or something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the site name from AzureAppServices.Metadata.SiteName?", + "reference": "This should have been moved up above this inner `try` because the log message in the `catch` block does not apply to this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Do we expect people to use PlanResult directly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "Maybe we should call this something like `errToReturn`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "should calculate numEpochIn1Year = xxx and <= fairBankEpochNum+numEpochIn1Year a.foundationBonusLastEpoch just happens to be equal to 1 year now, but should not count on that" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I wasn't sure if the content type needed to be removed from both the `default` and `usemap` objects - I'm not sure how usemap is used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Duplication of line 28 Please refer your tox -e flake8 It seems that XStrField, XShortField, FieldLenField are not used" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't really understand the `self._file_model.index(path)` as parent here - you use `self._root_index` for `rowCount` above, so wouldn't the parent here need to be `self._root_index` as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Do we want validation somewhere that max >= min? Or simply treat the max < min case as ignoring max?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": ":+1: that's a easier example :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `findProductIdsWithBoundAttributeByAttributeId` method.", + "reference": "If an external module decorates this interface, such a change will cause it to generate an error" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a FNM_PERIOD?", + "reference": "Oh ha hah, FNM_PERIOD worked out nicely there. Points for co-opting a file system convention." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "wrong grouping. As you can tell from the other files, we put system packages in the first group, the 3rd party packages in the second group, and our own packages in the third group." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `JobLogOpts` class. I don't think we should move this into the `JobLogOpts` class. I think we should move this into the `JobLogOpts` class.", + "reference": "Is `o.name` always set here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Can this line be removed, as `SteadyStateDependencies` isn't updated anywhere? Also do we need to check the `TransitionDependencySet` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`plan.present?` and `has_active_subscription?` are equivalent. We can drop this change, while leaving the one on `app/controllers/application_controller.rb`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "No need for this, as pylint already only turns things off for this function and it's needed for the entire function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "L171 needs to be modified too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to dag_node_create function.", + "reference": "Why do you compare by nodeid? Simply saying d == e should be enough. Unless we have to objects in memory with the same nodeid. If that is so, something went really wrong." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model.", + "reference": "configs/pvt/retinanet_pvt_t_fpn_1x_coco.py --> configs/pvt/retinanet_pvt-t_fpn_1x_coco.py" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `json:\"DesiredStatus,omitempty\"`", + "reference": "Nit, this could be json:\",omitempty\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "It's kinda funny to read `s.Image.Image` I wonder why it resulted to this way. What would it take to refactor to just `s.Image`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate PR.", + "reference": "nit: I like the idea! can we instead change the tag to `integration-remote` to be more specific? I feel like it's possible for us to use the `deploy` build tag for possibly another scenario" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Copy and paste error here. Edit: Also missing commas here and in other Perl croaks between some parameters and not others." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "stateRoot or maybe ParentHeader would make more sense from API point of view?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Are you sure that this is no longer needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Would it help to use SCAN_COLUMNS as base to build SCAN_WITH_STATS_COLUMNS e.g like so `SCAN_WITHSTATS_COLUMNS = ImmutableList.builder().addAll(SCAN_COLUMNS).add(\"value_counts\",....).build()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this service is deprecated, use ReportStat instead.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in ReportStat" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "We don't want to add boost as a dependency when building the Thrift compiler. Sorry." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It's not printing the range. Also I think it's useful to print a warning above stating that the minimum change is -1000." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "if name is empty will this become enumerate? (and cause the unmarshal to fail?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `edit_subscription_path`", + "reference": "How about including a flash message that explains the exercises are only available to subscribers of X plan?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "You should also call `e.accept()` and `return` so the key press isn't processed further (as we're leaving insert mode anyways)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `mail.register_interceptor` method.", + "reference": "Freeze mutable objects assigned to constants." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Hmm, this feels hacky. Maybe good enough if it makes the test more stable, but why is timing even an aspect here, since below it should wait for these two things anyway?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Do we want this on by default, or an opt-in (e.g. via some config while add the instrumentation)? I guess a more general question is - what's the bar for the default vs opt-in tags." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the `nebula::WebService::registerHandler(\"/graph\", [] { return new nebula::graph::GraphHttpHandler(); });", + "reference": "`status` is just one of the features, named as status is not suitable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `FeedFilter` class. I don't think that's a good way to do it.", + "reference": "There is an option to hide the subscriptions list from the sidebar. If it is hidden, the filter text should not be displayed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'd like for all of this to be dynamically configurable at some point, but it doesn't have to be in this PR. Can add it to the future SIP or create a separate JIRA for it, as you think would be appropriate." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is for.", + "reference": "move the constructor to down the `namespace`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Nit: ending with a '.' looks consistent with the fields around it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not add the audit fields to the audit fields.", + "reference": "Audit log will not have a warning about they are using a deprecated path, is it something we must care about?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "I think you also want to update the condition to add ` || impl.Visibility == TypeMemberVisibility.FamilyOrAssembly`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`DepositToRewardingFundBaseGas` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "What do you think of \"operations\"?? Also what do these emojis look like on Linux??" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to go about this, but I'm not sure how to go about it. I'm not sure how to go about it, but I'm not sure how to go about it. I'm not sure how to go about it, but I'm not sure how to go about it. I'm not sure how to go about it, but I'm not sure how to go about it.", + "reference": "I like the word \"give\" here. Feels like I'm giving a gift to my team." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Is it possible to use `np.random` module instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the default color to white. I don't think we should change the default color.", + "reference": "``default=None`` implies ``allow_None`` so ``allow_None`` is superfluous here. As a special case, if allow_None=True (which is true by default if the parameter has a default of None when declared) then a value of None is also allowed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Is there anything in particular that makes setting up the downstream rolebinding(s) to `system:k3s-controller` burdensome or confusing? This changes looks fine to me but it seems a shame to alias an embedded k3s controller. If we are doing this in other places that I am not aware of then we can dismiss this concern out of hand." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate file.", + "reference": "nit: all other types in this project have full names, so maybe a better name would be `OperatingSystem`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Why is this needed here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception, but I don't think it should be an exception.", + "reference": "mmm, why a method declaration should not have the TypeVariableResolutionCapability? Is this ok?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `TransactionPool` class.", + "reference": "nit: any reason you swapped the ordering?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "can you de-uglify at least this line?.. hard to tell what changed..." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Please can you merge master in before making these changes. I just reinstated a bunch of BPF UTs. Possible that the UTs use this code." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.", + "reference": "Do you want to add additional cases for `Bla.__b()` and `self.__c()`? (Just add additional classmethods `__b` and `__c` and the calls to `__init__`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "the recids is never changed after. So, it should contains the exact shown results, whatever are the rights for the user (admin or simple user, restricted collections...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't the docstring mention that the MD5 checksum of `p` is computed each time and verified? Also, could there be use cases where a caller might not want such a check to happen because, eg, a blob storage solution doesn't provide MD5 verification or uses another hash algorithm such as SHA256?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should do this in the event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event event", + "reference": "focusRedirect is used in the powerpnt appModule. We might have to make sure that this does not break. Having said that, I really like this being handled on the events level!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test file.", + "reference": "You imports are out of order" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).)..........................................................................................................................................", + "reference": "This should not be called Flow Trigger. FlowTrigger should has its own flowTrigger job name, for instance, \"flowtrigger\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this file to the top of the file. It's not a big deal, but I think it's a good idea to move this file into the top of the file.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why do we need `\\n` if we already use `WriteLine`? (and `\\n` is not cross platform)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "What is instrumentation name used for? I'm not seeing other classes use it, only a getter, constructor, and builder." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "@kristofgazso could you review these warnings?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "will delete this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a button here.", + "reference": "~~Indent 2 lines above~~ Disregard. My fault" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should move this to the `initValueConfig.hasFormattingConfig()` method.", + "reference": "What was the bug that this is fixing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this header is needed.", + "reference": "This will always add the authorization header to the request object. Is this the right scope for these two lines? If username/password are not defined, it will encode 'Basic :'" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Is this always how Bazel does paths? Would it be nicer to do `-DBAZEL_TEST_DATA_PATH=../com_github_google_flatbuffers/tests/` so this string is not hardcoded in the the source?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should index the date and time based upon UTC and not the client machine.", + "reference": "Not an expert of ES, so not sure of the impact here." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Who deletes the memory for the granteeList? (or the roleList for that matter)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This loop is missing a lock on subscriptions_mutex." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "shouldn't clearance be setting these up for us?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Need to update the doc for `TelemetrySDK` and `Host` structs deleting references from removed functions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I think we should keep that here and add a new method `isSyntacticallyFinal` that returns `super.isFinal()` (and can be used in UnnecessaryModifier). Otherwise the contract of `isFinal` is not respected" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Is there a reason why we wouldn't want to check this every time? Why are we only checking for the footer and scroll bar when enableCellEditOnFocus is true?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new line.", + "reference": "You need to create an API for this class. This class should follow roughly the same dependency structure than RemoteAvailableInstallersPlayOnLinuxImplementation / RemoteAvailableInstallers. Maybe we could use a inner class here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name to update workflow_type_name and workflow_type_name.", + "reference": "This should not be a case, right? If `run_id` is the same `workflow_id` can't be changed. Actually surprised that it is not part of a key." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the next line.", + "reference": "How would AQR work for an INSERT/SELECT of one table into another where a LOB column is being copied?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the github.com/envoyproxy/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go-control-plane/go", + "reference": "Since these are ultimately different endpoints, it would be nice if we could move them up one level and nuke the common `sds` directory in order to reduce path stutter" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not supported anymore?", + "reference": "Please check also whether `null` occurs in the rest of `beforeChangeResult` array." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((false))))/(((((((((false))))))/(((((((((((false))))/((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Outdated docs. There is no response, there's an ack." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I'd rather have the container process remove the FIFO after it unblocks. Then `start` can always `Exec()`, and you can catch the \"FIFO does not exist\" error and translate it to a prettier \"someone must have already started the container\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "can you check if there's other similar cases to add nil-check like this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`<= 64`? I just picked up what you said in #3981 (\"the CN field is limited to 64 characters\") but maybe there's something I don't know where the 64th character is needed (trailing dot or whatever?) Also this sounds like something that could be beautifully unit tested. Sorry for bugging you :grin:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I understand that this grabs a Licenses objects but what is the autocomplete method used for? What does this do in context of the auto_completes controller?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the transaction location from the transaction hash?", + "reference": "I don't really like that way of naming methods based on their arguments. But I can see that the other method names are the same..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "@sekmiller This method correctly strips the leading and trailing slashes (and also \".\" and \"-\"); But I thought the plan was also to replace any multiple slashes between nested folders with a single slash. For example, as implemented now, I can enter \"folder1///folder2\", and it gets saved and displayed like this, with the 3 slashes. I thought we wanted to sanitize it as \"folder1/folder2\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Looks like the X86 inline assembly is not happy with this type. I will update that" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Tabs and a space, again." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))())))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((/(((((", + "reference": "Please just enclose if blocks with brackets; this has created issues in the past so I'd prefer we don't use them" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the `approve_proposal_url` from `approve_proposal_url`", + "reference": "`version` isn't need anymore because it's built into `approve_proposal_url`, yes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Moved to the bottom of the file. `CtrlPDU` sits on `BTLE_DATA` so let's put it after" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [8/80]
Space is too long. [8/80]", + "reference": "This ends up requiring the `json` gem, right? Is there any way we can do this to be implementation agnostic (e.g. to let me use `yajl-ruby` for performance reasons (or because my app already brings in a JSON library)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This seems dangerous. What circumstances lead to the need for a retry? Can that happen more than once? I'm concerned that if we hit the pathological state, this could turn into a CPU spinner. I wonder if we could get the same benefit from just \"trying again\" and failing if it fails the second time." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "If there is a reference to other fields or methods, please do the initialization in the constructor." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future. I think it would be better to add a `require('raw-loader!@salesforce/design-system-react/components/pill/__examples__/avatars.jsx')` to the `require('raw-loader!@salesforce/design-system-react/components/pill/__examples__/avatars.jsx')`", + "reference": "These should be importing from `pill-container`" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not possible?", + "reference": "Why this change? It will now only show on the bottom of the screen as white text, is it correct behaviour?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Does this need to allocate a string or would a nil value (indicating no header) be a better?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a functional component?", + "reference": "Nit: Past tense of `reset` is also `reset`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this use `'n'` instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "revert back to 'TASK_TYPE_ACTIVITY_TIMEOUT'" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Shouldn't we prefer passing a pointer by reference T*&, since these are C++ bindings?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: Personally I feel that it's cleaner to let `toAntreaPeerForCRD` to take `ingressRule` as a param instead of `ingressRule.From`. It can call `processRefCGs` inside the function and do the ipBlock/AG union within the function itself. It might not be worth the refactor though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the correct way to do it.", + "reference": "Pending has been set only for SPC.. why? for other CRs as well, this need to be done.. right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "would use an empty string here as default and then check for emptiness in the twig template. I dont like mixing types @core23 what do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "How come we need case manipulation for the nextPageToken and not for pageToken?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this in the routes.rb file.", + "reference": "why use these rather than regular named paths?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file. I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Hm, I don't think the extra flags are doing any harm here, but it does seem like `--help` is the only flag you could *actually* use with this command. We might eventually want to separate those out." + }, + { + "prediction": "How do we get the recordings belonging to the users in the last 7 days?", + "reference": "We should make this a docstring, so that editors are able to pick it up." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should expect_authed_to_access_event_fired_for(video)", + "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "App cache size is now managed dynamically by the `WebView`. This statement has no effect in the new framework." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "VirtualNode has a `hasAttr` function, any reason why you're not using it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This now throws when running tests (maybe the move to java 11??). Do we want to keep it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We can allow 7-char SHA, does not mean we want to show with 7-char in default, please change to `if len() > 10`, then cut." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a duplicate file.", + "reference": "this one should also have quotes i guess :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Using the variable on range scope `mock` in function literal (from `scopelint`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "does this result in a 200 when the dataset is still inprogress/publishing not yet finalized? Seems like 202 is the right code for that (as it was) and the test should be watching for a 202?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Previously you could only order by the field you were searching by. But for full-text search, you can search across all indexed fields, and it didn't make sense not to have a sorting. For backward compatibility, the javascript code uses indexPath as the orderPath when no orderPath is provided." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a bug or is it a bug?", + "reference": "VIM didn't like your whitespace." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\"),\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "Are you sure the namespace should change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "@martijn00 I'm not sure why we're keeping the object parameter and return type since this can be done by using MvxApplication with THint set to object" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "why do we create a time type here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Does this style actually need to get loaded in all of these components?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "import but not used so you did not resolve compile warnings?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is so much more concise and beautiful than the previous formula" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Is there any reason not to have the `static` modifier for the logger? _(that would be in keeping with the reference being uppercase)_" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It's not about session creation config. It's about passing consumer config parameters to underlying transport - nothing to do with session itself" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why is there an \"enable\" in the param name? Couldn't it just be `overrideDebug`? Here are everywhere else." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "`published.recently_published_first` reads a little oddly to me. Is this the same thing as `Video.published.ordered`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Encountered this because I had a stray comma. Figured I'd tweak it a bit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-rerererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererere", + "reference": "qq: Should this include the iptables6-save sim. to the inverse checks above?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "im open to explicitly checking NotSet value here but json logic already handles it so kept it this way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ScriptingEnvironment.h` file, so that we don't have to include the `ScriptingEnvironment.h` file.", + "reference": "The naming of the include file appears to be unlucky." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Bit worried about this. At minimum you should make a copy of the dict here to avoid modifying a user supplied variable." + }, + { + "prediction": "is a limit to the number of versions does not grow without bound by following a simple rule: For each version we create, we delete one old version.", + "reference": "Is it better to create one before pruning? In case creation fails we don't want to delete the previous one. We create a new one, it is tagged as latest, so the previous can be deleted. `CreateLaunchTemplateVersion` returns the version created, how about directly trying to delete the previous version? Assuming the numbering is strictly increasing." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Do we require the specific implementation information here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `domain_banned?` method in the `domain_banned?` method. I don't think we should add this to the `domain_banned?` method in the `domain_banned?` method. I don't think we should add this to the `domain_banned?` method.", + "reference": "How about `exists?(['domain ~*?', domain.downcase])`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this getting used in other places? Can we switch all the places to use the new API you added?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "This need to be checked with linux. AFAIK, we have this file in our bin directory that is a link to the system file." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Shouldn't we import `default`? I can't get here to test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "!!!!!!!!!!!!! @graingert, does this mean that tests haven't been running???" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((-(-(------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "I've already tried the null-coalescing operator here and got a strange error, so did this the old-fashioned way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This doesn't follow our spacing convention. It's also a little hard to read. Can you reformat?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `pipelineCfnTemplatePath`.", + "reference": "The deploy should come before template? EDIT: I see that in other files, we put a separate line and put deploy at the end. What is the reason for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Consider making a constant (e.g. `MetricStreamConfiguration.Drop`)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "same question: why not just switch this to range too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "@chuckatkins most places used an empty string for \"no type\", but a few used `\"unknown\"`. I've converted both cases to `Type::None`. Do you know why there was a distinction before?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////)))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "should we assert for the type for `FeatureGroupData`? I think it should be 1-Byte type." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "As long as you are sure this is definitely correct now... :-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to create a new one.", + "reference": "... so that all action buttons have the same height :-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Use correct, alpha sorted, include order. Correct order means: 1. Header corresponding to this source (i.e. `\"LatencyTestPublisher.hpp\"`) 2. C system headers 3. C++ system headers 4. Alpha-sorted external libraries headers 5. Alpha-sorted public headers from this project 6. Alpha-sorted private headers" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I hate this name, open to suggestions." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the cache from an arbitrary reader? I'm not sure how to get the cache from an arbitrary reader.", + "reference": "Does this log line work? We need Warningf or just warning without the format string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `New` method.", + "reference": "The pull controller would need similar updates." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed anymore.", + "reference": "ignore this.. just didn't want to litter with a commit update to satisfy license plugin" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this definition needed since it doesn't look like it's being used anywhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Can this condition be reworded using `if` please?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "after ||, no need inputs!= nullptr" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right path to the integration test build spec.", + "reference": "Is it just preference or on purpose that using slice of structs instead of slice of pointers?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This line always confused me anyway. Good catch!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should we add `ctx` to `BlockServer.Shutdown()` for this purpose? Would be nice, but I don't care too much." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Duration_t at RTPS level must be serialized using fractions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "\"peer\" has its own meaning within YARPC with its own class of objects. This should probably be \"dispatcher\" too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I do not like this line break before `=true`. Maybe starting the list in the next line would help to reduce the indent? This way we could keep this string together." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this flag.", + "reference": "_plugins should be removed too" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "The rule selector will not include `` and `` elements. Why not make this a new, separate rule altogether?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "@The-Compiler Is this style okay or would you prefer a common userscript exception base?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))((((((((------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "we'd need to return a MongooseBuffer here instead of the Binary. lets add the subtype option to the buffer schema type as referenced in #1000 instead." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Let's remove this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think that's a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Could you split this into multiple lines?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This technically works, however it may be safer to use both `getCurrentReferenceURL` and `getCurrentEntityURL` and then make this condition `currentReferenceURL === currentEntityURL`. Currently, this code only works based on the internals of `getCurrentReferenceURL`, so by checking both we would decouple that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "It does not recommend capitalization" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Minor thing, but can you use 1.9 hash syntax for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "I tried to follow the code structure already present." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "seems reasonable to also want to include the 'to' location?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Please leave 1 space char between commas here and other places in this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(())(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "hm is this really &&? Not ||? Was it initially correct if any of these things are not set that it needs to recreated?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please don't use C-style array declarations. IMO our pre-commit ought to be enhanced to not allow this" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "@rhc54 This doesn't look like a comprehensive comparison. For `PMIX_STRING` we seem to actually compare the content of the data while here we only compare meta-information which doesn't ensure that values are the same." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I think `bypass_frontier_confirmation` conveys the intention better (default false as well)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "This looks like it goes beyond the scope of removing `BlockHeight()`, in the future please do this in a separate commit at a minimum -- separate PR is fine too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `self._widget = None`", + "reference": "You'll also need to adjust `FakeWebTabAudio` in `tests/helpers/stubs.py`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this file.", + "reference": "@csrwng what should we do here? This one is from origin." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Follow alphabetical order." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `GetDistributedTrace` method. I don't think we should add this to the `GetDistributedTrace` method.", + "reference": "As far as I can tell, these always get and set the context as an `IReadOnlyDictionary`. Can we use that here instead of `object` and get rid of the `as IReadOnlyDictionary`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "As you only have `{}` as the format string (without anything else in it), this is the same as doing `self._doc.setHtml(html.escape(self._opt.text))`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Where would this be configured? In azkaban.properties?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "1. Use `const` instead of `var` here. 2. Move the check to after the `if (update == null || typeof update!== 'object')`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "Let's assume that on Linux `eventfd` is always available as a wrapper of the eventfd2 system call. It is supported since linux 2.6.27 + glibc 2.9, as well as from the ancient versions of bionic. In other words, it would be fair to argue that the pair would be available on practically all platforms that provide `pipe2`. Therefore switching from using `pipe2` to `eventfd` on linux unconditionally would not cause issues on our users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "This field could be `final`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "would be good to have a test for the case when `shutdown!` raises" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Does upsert pass this check also?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Apologies reviewers, I did end up pushing another change. I was starting to request SRE-P help to get the apiserver configs from some clusters before and after when I realized I can just log the stdout from the patch command to see if anything was changed or not. Much simpler to verify if my work did or did not make changes to the config during the transition. Also got the spacing issue you mentioned @abhinavdahiya Thanks all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should rename this to \"kbfs_config_name_temp\"", + "reference": "I'm not sure this naming is a good idea; that's the format for macOS xattr metadata files on unsupported filesystems." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Space inside { missing.
Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "Metrics/LineLength: Line is too long. [85/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Please remove these imports. The project's style is to use `Assert.assertEquals` and not import static methods in general. This also caused a lot of unnecessary changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "thanks. Note that returning at this point might leak memory from the allocations above, so the PR will need to take care of that too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "If you really want to rename this, you'll also need to adjust the name in `__init__` and in other places it's used (`browser/commands.py`)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "As discussed at standup, I gave up on this. Calling `DeleteMapLayerMetadataCommand` felt cleaner anyway because there might be other cleanup that needs to happen. @scolapasta and @matthew-a-dunlap plan to discuss this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "Do we need these changes? If so, can you tidy up the messages? Looks like it might have been your testing/debugging changes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.", + "reference": "where is the default being set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "these changes should likely be in the next commit instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Since you have defined this struct, I would suggest to replace all exist literal structs by this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to false.", + "reference": "The field name doesn't really capture what this option does. I think `mConfirmDiscardMessage` would be a better choice." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "what if `$media->getBinaryContent() == Symfony\\Component\\HttpFoundation\\File\\File` does `is_string()` return `true`? ping @greg0ire" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "maybe rather than `bool` make this field a `StructDef *`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Shall we maybe put this in a `const` like `backgroundTaskTimeout`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this.", + "reference": "CI is complaining about this." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Let's only change a file if it is really necessary. Such a change does not bring much value and makes it harder to find the original commit in which the method was introduced." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I would prefer to set up space between classes in format pattern, `%s %s` and then use `trim()` to remove unnecessary whitespaces. This will also solve stripping whitespaces from the beginning and end of a string `$attributes['class']`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "when Op is illegal should return here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the version key from the list.", + "reference": "don't we need to remove the project version from installedVersions?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "the bridge here isn't defined as an accessor / reader to try mask it better. So you need to directly call the iVar `@bridge` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This is intended. Pls revert this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Something wrong with cast to `(Comparator<> & Serializable)`, need to be investigated" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we need this. Not sure, I'll test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm going to need to check if google compute requires these steps in this order, or if you can disable iptables after the fact." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `build/static/charts/traefik-crd-10.3.001.tgz` file.", + "reference": "Did go change their tags with the new version?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate `Store` for this. I don't think we should have a separate `Store` for this, but I don't think we should have a separate `Store` for this. I don't think we should have a separate `Store` for this, but I don't think we should have a separate `Store` for this. I think it would be better to have a separate `Store` for this.", + "reference": "I don't recall what we decided here in terms of which source would get priority. As written, the static configuration will overwrite datastore results." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "I think it should still panic for when there are no outputs; might be nice to special-case that though so the message is more explicit." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "*NULL_DEREFERENCE:* object `null` is dereferenced by call to `meterSupplier(...)` at line 122." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "switch over to.mode" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I guess your IDE did some auto-fixing here" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This is an unused import failing recommit still." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this file to the target_module_dir.", + "reference": "I'm concerned that we're conflating multiple things here. There are 2 things that Beaker should really care about: - Network transport - i.e. `ssh` vs `winrm` - Interpreter - i.e. `bash`, `cmd`, `powershell`, etc The problem is that @cowofevil is running Bitvise SSH, and he assumed we should be setting `is_cygwin: false` in node definitions. But that doesn't really accurately convey what we care about, and since Beaker doesn't appear to track network transport apart from interpreter, we end up in a strange state. `is_cygwin: false` appears to end up setting `is_powershell?` to `true`, which IMHO is not accurate or appropriate. Bitvise templates use `ssh` (like Cygwin), but the interpreter used is `cmd`, not `powershell`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think this is ok for now. This ties into the larger issue of the site not having a consistent method for relaying form input errors. Please make sure the focus gets set on the close button when the dialog opens." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should these link be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Please make this a keyword-only argument by adding a `*` argument before `add_undo`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "didn't quite follow what this code block is doing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good solution.", + "reference": "this doesn't sound pretty... I would rather we have a proper navigation for all modes - AFAIK TV remote navigation is very similar to normal keyboard, but maybe it just uses another key codes - those should be extracted in a single file and defined there depending on context then" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `dom.isControlled()` function.", + "reference": "After diffing the children we check whether the value got out of sync, if it did we update it. We also update the `_prevValue` to prepare for the next event hitting our controlled component" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed in order to start a Bee node. I don't think this is needed in order to start a Bee node. I don't think this is needed in order to start a Bee node. I don't think it is needed in order to start a Bee node. I don't think it is needed in order to start a Bee node.", + "reference": "It provides a type called Node which is a fully functional bee client. This package is where the dependencies are injected. It is not just a glue-code, it is concept of node." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think this will change `''` to `'%'` unconditionally, i.e. there'll be no way to set `''` anymore. This should really only be used for values which make no sense anymore." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this table.", + "reference": "Nit: this table's row key map -> this table's row keys map" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the debug level?", + "reference": "this change should be reverted" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'm a bit confused about the `os.path.dirname(basedir)` here - is this just to get to the parent directory? Either way, I think I'd prefer just having this in `update_version.py` as it's not needed in qutebrowser itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Revert this change and see below why..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should not switch to `lvis_v1_instance` here because that base config uses ClassBalancedDataset to oversample the data." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "This is an informational message that allows someone to read the console output and understand how the grid node is configured. Please leave." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This doesn't make sense to me. What does RaiseSingleton mean? To me it sounds like a single object is being.. raised? Not sure." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate test.", + "reference": "What's the benefit of having jobExecutorTests as a member variable? What do you think about making the method static? Afterall, it is a stateless method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check", + "reference": "This looks like it's only downloading things, not really checking their true validity. Especially for the MD object. Should we call `BareRootMetadata.IsValidAndSigned()` in `mdGet`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Nikoli, I believe that this addresses your concern. One question for you or Jae-Seung is if any allocation from the clone is properly cleaned up when the vector is destroyed. I believe that it should." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate app.", + "reference": "should be `ECSApp`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "flake8 is going to fail on this having 2 lines" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "should we make a dir named controllers/scheduler/podchaos" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `KeyNodeHostname`.", + "reference": "there seems to be one KeyNode in kubernetes.go of PV.. would it make sense to use it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Im gonna be a little annoying here but did you configure your linter correctly? This empty line should not be here. Maybe go to settings and check if `goimports` is enabled?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a case, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Don't think this belongs in this pr" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We can assert on the existence of Outbounds through ClientConfig calls right? Since this is only for tests, do we need this function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "@martijn00 so this PR introduces a new ViewModel lifecyle method? It isn't in the PR description/any new docs" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Are these modification duplicate? Or should we move it into base detector." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not change the seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed seed", + "reference": "Since this is private and single use it should be un-wrapped inside of the two-arg dagSeed method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "why the order change? Also for the next chunk. (I understand the result will be the same though)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I wonder if this should just be a single `string`? We don't have any cases where we return different types and it would make the parser simpler to just read a single identifier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't think this needs to change. Can you go back to the previous implementation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Bump it 2 lines higher, 'c' > 'u'." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please do not add author here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `database/sql` file.", + "reference": "Similarly, we should be able to persist action uniformly" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I think i'd prefer this override to be in the test helper instead, if that's possible?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This would be better with context added via wrapping or fmt.errorf()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "What's the purpose of this file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not possible to get the pass code from the store store pass code from the store store pass code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode code from the store store passcode", + "reference": "@bhariharan Why was passcode length requirement allowed to be lowered?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "This file needs a license header, too. Sorry I didn't catch that earlier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "probably don't need `[:]` why not reference into `github.com/algorand/go-algorand/daemon/algod/api/server/lib` here and skip bouncing off daemon/algod/server.go?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why reference is converted to table?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "should we implement pagination in the fake datastore so the server startup code that paginates entries for trust domain validation can be tested?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `f.Vectorized!= nil`, not `f.Vectorized!= nil`.", + "reference": "What mechanism will be exposed so the caller knows they're using the vectorized version?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we remove respond_to block its not required here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to include `oneapi/dal/table/homogen.hpp`", + "reference": "Do not do that even in example, we demonstrate bad practice" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Hm, taking a second look over this, this is why we have the object inheritance structure that we do. This could be divided up by having a custom determine_if_x86_64 in the pswindows/exec hosts and then a default method in hosts.rb. That way all the custom ps windows work is in a single location." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "We have to `.Complete` now because of empty/null string test cases." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [8/7/80]
Line is too long. [8/7/", + "reference": "Is there still a way to specify no recursion?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "How is this name being URI safe and being used programmatically related?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we have to keep this as a fallback for now, else it's a small breaking change :(" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "nit: shouldn't be part of this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "this change looks wrong to me. I think the test is trying to signal that something went wrong by throwing the `Error` here, otherwise the `catch` below will swallow it." + }, + { + "prediction": "IsThreadAgnostic already exists?", + "reference": "I'm doubting if this should be `if (_layout.IsThreadAgnostic)`, as ThreadAgnostic stuff could be calculated on every thread. (and thus could be lazy). non-ThreadAgnostic should be calculated on the main thread." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Please use only `Logger` instead of `org.slf4j.Logger`" + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be set to false?", + "reference": "Should this be \"no limiter drop\", since this isn't an absolutely essential activity for the stability of the network?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.", + "reference": "I updated many of the success messages, because most of these operations don't return data if they succeed. This meant many of the operations would print: `Success null` if the script ran successfully." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not raise an error. I think we should raise an error if the error is raised. I think we should raise an error if the error is raised. I think we should raise an error if the error is raised. I think we should raise an error if the error is raised.", + "reference": "Could you simply add it to the previous clause?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "@joshyrobot, I think you can just use localeCompare with only the first argument and leave the other arguments out (here and all the other lines changed). It seems to do the right thing, and then we don't have to worry about these extra options." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message. I don't think this should be a log message, but I don't think it should be a log message. I don't think this should be a log message, but I think it should be a log message. I don't think it should be a log message, but I think it should be a log message. I don't think it should be a log message.", + "reference": "@chengren311 : where does this logic move to?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we have a `nil` exception check at `s.scope.ManagedMachinePool`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the `@var array` here.", + "reference": "Rather than deleting this, should you just reformat it so it's the `*` settings, so if nothing is configured in facets.ini, the existing default behavior continues to work?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `$property` instead of `$property`", + "reference": "wrap, single line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "always use brackets for if statements" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "`NUnitIntegration` doesn't need to cache this anymore." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why did you change it to `>=` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Looks like this needs to be updated. There is no need to remove `hadoop.` if Hadoop tables don't use this code path." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This require isn't need anymore, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `payments/crypto` file.", + "reference": "a bit weird to see payments crypto package inside connection manager. There probably will be services not having any relation with payments that will use connection manager. Thats why probably ping-ping by itself can be useful without any relation to payments.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a trait, not a trait.", + "reference": "I like the overall idea here, but I wonder if it would be more clear to define the property in the trait, and then set it in the constructors of the classes using the trait. Alternatively, at a bare minimum, it may be a good idea to add `?? 'Bibliographic'` here, to account for the possibility of the trait being used in a class that does not define the property at all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "I would prefer to not have a magic number, but construct this value out of other constants we already have." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "The limitation is if somebody configure another policy with the same name, but it is an edge case we can ignore I guess." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "? The package is named `hashivault`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't think this should enable xwayland, because it's convenient to toggle xwayland just by setting `xwayland` to `false`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Remove this line by accident?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Calling `.stream()` on a `DomainObjectCollection` is pretty much always a bug, as it doesn't include objects added later (and encourages people to use afterEvaluate). I wonder if we should make this an error prone check?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Thanks for paying attention to other places this might happen. This one is particularly important; I probably never should have gotten in the habit of CheckErr(), since it does a log.Panic() explicitly, which looks like something else until you look closely. It's supposed to be used places where \"can't happen\" but Things Can Happen." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "What is the different between nw_tos and ip_dscp? Only high 6 bits vs low 6 bits and supported version?" + }, + { + "prediction": "to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to", + "reference": "I'm assuming that asSmarts & cxSmiles == asSmarts" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Seems like an oversight but I don't think the super would do anything else in this case unless I'm mistaken." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Curious, do we consider this as pedantic for example code?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Should we convert the entity name to snake case using `Doctrine\\Common\\Inflector\\Inflector::tableize` or similar? Should a `snaked_name` or whatever be part of the entity metadata in order to use it for form names, ids, & other html attributes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should be `client.outboundIp`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate file. I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Must these `using` statements not go inside the `namespace` block?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why? I thought the previous way was idiomatic. (Same with the `MetadataVer` stuff above.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "shouldn't we `reject` here instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "check err or use gasPriceUnitIOTX, _ := if we are sure action.Core.GasPrice is correct" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Just curious, was wait not used at all before?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nit: can we remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a synchronized method.", + "reference": "is it not a problem when one synchronized function is called by other?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Space inside { missing.
Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "We (even as admins) shouldn't override the User Preference settings like `email_master`, `email_posts`, `email_kudos`, `email_new_followers`. These all would be set by the user of their choice. Please do remove these attributes from editing//updating. Thanks!" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "\"Este :attribute j est anexado.\" sounds better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This line should be repeated for every module that needs testing. One cannot rely on nosetest to automatically discover all the modules. On the bright side, there is no need to change any of the other files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This error was unused" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Personally I wish we didn't have a proto for every single little thing we do. RequestShardAction with an enum for the action type would be a lot cleaner imo, but I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed :) Just kvetching." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Does this make more sense as `trails/_trail` now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should create a new instance and create a new instance and create a new instance and create a new instance.", + "reference": "synced offline. let's move this to `agent_unix.go` to make the IMDS call, since this is not supported in Windows." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this mapping to the `PythonMappings` class.", + "reference": "Too much indentation here. Should match the lines above, which have four spaces." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Same here we still need this test to make sure the fallback works." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's worth it, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. I'm not sure if it's worth it, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. If it's worth it, I'm not sure if it's worth it. If it's worth it, I'm not sure if it's worth it. If it's worth it, I'm not sure if it's worth it. If it's worth it, I'm not sure if it's worth it. If it's worth it, I'm not sure if it's worth it. If it's worth it, I'm not sure if it's worth it, but if it's worth it.", + "reference": "I'm wondering if we can actually base this on a `IMvxPresentationAttribute` instead of the base one." + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be null.", + "reference": "could we switch to `undefined` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "The cleanup call" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "I think \"View artist\" is a bit more standard and expected. Or even \"Go to artist\" to take the Spotify terminology as-is." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "It might make sense to refactor this later so that we use a Bolt-native type to hide sensitive values." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "We were trying to move away from this to force people to always run tests under py.test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `webdriver.common.keys` file.", + "reference": "1 - create browser specific options class: - chromeoptions - firefoxoptions - argsoptions" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good fix, but I don't think it's a good fix.", + "reference": "should be a case insensitive match though no? DOCTYPE and doctype are both widely used" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We must have a `fail ParamNotFound` here for cases where `@account.nil?`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "How come this change was needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2` should be `ADC0` and `ADC1` and `ADC2`", + "reference": "Why are there only 6 pins here, while below it appears to have 8 ADC inputs? Are pin 2 and 5 used for something else on this board?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "I think we need an issue to track that chain sync omits BLS messages, and then to fix and test it!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "what is this default about? I am not using ngrok atm so would prefer an env var." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to set this to true in production enviroments.", + "reference": "@Samuell1 Might be better to say \"Automatically check for plugin updates on login\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Thanks for the additional Process helper! Can we also cache the first `Process.GetCurrentProcess()` result in a static field so we don't have to repeatedly call it? It means we would also need to dispose it when the static `_runtimeMetricsWriter` instance is disposed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `StartMetricsSession` method.", + "reference": "just wondering what is the result of breaking the logic we test here? it seems that in that case we will just not return immediately, but i'm not sure whether the test will fail?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We should fail the test if this returns `err!= nil`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to keep track of whether we should increment metricProvisionFailedTerminal?", + "reference": "What is the drawback of not having this flag as a gating condition to report the metric?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`getProcessName()` will be less ambiguous, since Caddy has \"apps\" that it runs internally." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Is there any way to not hardcode this given we know the size in bytes? The public API has the flexibility of being a Span. Should we maybe not do anything printing DML? The runtime allocates the buffer, but it's a \"scratch memory\" area, The delegate gets it passed in and they decide how to use it. Also, how is DML used if the feature is for macOS support?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not do that. I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "How about just override the `buildFilter`? Passing another function here is a little weird." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a separate argument.", + "reference": "This should just be a `.Bool()` flag I think, we don't encode anything beyond y/n here. See `$(RUN_CHECK)` and `$(STOP_ON_PKG_FAIL)` for examples of how to pass those in." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))))((())))(((((()))))((())))((((()))))(((((())))((()))(((())))((((())))((((()))((((())))(((((()))(((((((()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Is this needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This code is passing a non localized string when it should be passing in a localized string or it should use the name of the item being deleted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "how about moving it under L26" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `memoize` method.", + "reference": "I think this needs to be tested" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the Trail model.", + "reference": "Style/MutableConstant: Freeze mutable objects assigned to constants." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Just a thought, really. If it's a bug that can be probed for (and it can be - see Adrian's repro) then it could as well be a static initialization of a supplier of Deflater instances; if we probe for a buggy JVM, we return the wrapper. If we don't we return the Deflater. This way on non-affected JVMs nothing happens and if we do use the wrapper, we know the JVM is broken." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Looks like this should be publicly accessible for tests in any modules?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Allow putenv is necessary to be able to get environment variables with `getenv`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `if (year%400==0 && year%100!=0) {`", + "reference": "use function to check it. - don't do everything in main" + }, + { + "prediction": "How to make this work?", + "reference": "Sorry I'm confused. Why not kwarg this like the others?" + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't bother trying to detect that. We don't bother trying to detect that. We don't bother trying to detect that.", + "reference": "First, any changes here should be synchronized with instr_compute_VSIB_index(). Second, the original looks correct to me: the first letter of the opcode name suffix is the index size, while the second is the memory size. So \"vpgatherdq\" is a d-sized index and q-sized memory. The operand size we store for memory accesses is always the memory size, not the address size, and for VSIB we store a single memory element size. It looks like we have no inside-opnd_t storage of the index size: that's done by dispatch on opcode it seems. I have a bunch of notes of discussions on how to handle VSIB: we decided to bail on encoding too much inside the opnd_t I guess." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Sorry for going back and forth. Adding docstring here would be very helpful for others to understand the need of this method." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "You introduced a bug here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we log a warning/error if only one is specified and not the other?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log this in the log.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in GetLatestEvent" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error", + "reference": "This looks good to me. Personally, I would have the following for maximum flexibility: * convert peering_port from uint64_t to int. * Set the default value to \"-1\" to specify the value is not set * if the value is -1 then do `config.node.peering_port = network_params.network.default_node_port` That would allow for 0 to mean, select the port number yourself and be more consistent. But I am happy with the change as is, as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The blank line between the summary and detailed description is better to be kept." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to remove unused shapes.", + "reference": "Curiously, are these indents intended or should they be aligned?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "What if we changed this to this? roleText=attrs.get('roleText', lambda:getSpeechTextForProperties(reason=reason,role=role)) That will prevent the function from ever needing called in the roletext case, and removes that if." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "This will still result in a safe_read_tls_magic on AMD in tls_thread_preinit()." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Can you remove this change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Oh, was that a bug in the validation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Please use the Google java code style. Basically, add more space characters like in the statements below. Next to method arguments and curly braces. This is currently not checked on CI because it is too inconsistent in the code base but I would prefer new code to be consistent." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "Actually, I don't think we need to create object on heap." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "this is a file we copy from gRPC, sp ideally it be fixed upstream as well.." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "changes like this, just strangle guava usages to be replaced by DelayLimiter into one place" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the footer to the header and the footer to the footer. I don't think we should add the footer to the header and the footer to the footer. I don't think we should add the footer to the footer.", + "reference": "PropTypes need to be updated accordingly here. Note that the type also needs updating, not just the case. That is, these should both expect a `PropTypes.elementType` now instead of an `element`." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "maybe extra paren around `strncmp(...)!= 0`" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "We should call `Windows.onResume `: - When the app is launched for the first time - When the app is resumed after being paused (home button and resume or device goes to sleep) - After a permission prompt is displayed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Rename to ForksSchedule? Maybe in separate PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why a blank line here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in this PR. I don't think we need to do this in this PR, but I don't think we need to do this in this PR.", + "reference": "I have a sense that this will actually eventually change to check the actual date so that subscriptions can be deactivated in the future. But I mention that here just to keep you in the loop. We should not make that change now, because it's not needed functionality." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "What is the reasoning for using the negation of `isOption()` instead of simply using `isPositional()` to identify a positional param?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `GameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGameGame", + "reference": "Why would you add those if client version min is set to 1100?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "You can delete this, it will now need to live in `gointerfaces` package" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Okay, I still don't understand why you have to add `html_safe` here, and it still seems like a very bad idea. It will allow html tags in the title, and keep Rails from escaping literal greater-than or less-than chars not intended as HTML tags. It ought to work to just let Rails do HTML-escaing as normal, without any manual `html_safe` or `strip_tags` or whatever. I am not clear on what problem you are trying to solve, why the straightfoward approach does not work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to showSubjectInMessageHeader()", + "reference": "What is is subject when it's not the email subject. Why are we having to do this crap? What's calling this with an empty string?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Could you also remove the `defaultSamplingProbability` constant from `sampling.go`? It seems to became unused with this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "can you delete the `generateDeploymentStrategicPatch` function as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "I'd keep this at `info` level..." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Don't use DCHECK to debug your code if it's the regular branch you need to handle." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "You should return null here instead. Null is an acceptable default value for the image attribute." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "react bails as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `ROLE_ADMIN_AS_CUSTOMER`", + "reference": "Can you please tell me why you did this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Reading this again it should prob prefer the `videoConstraints.facingMode` value over `facingMode` if the former was already set" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Space inside { missing.
Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "There's a good bit of class-level stuff that's repeated in our various product types. Think it's worth extracting a...dare I say it...module?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please do not modify the `config.Target` field, it should contain exactly what is extracted from the JSON files. Instead, you can either: * Add a getter to the `config` variable (`*compileopts.Config`), so you can simply call `config.WasmAbi()` to get the value. * Use a local variable instead. The getter would be slightly cleaner, as it matches the pattern of other configurations (`CGO_ENABLED`, `GC`, `NeedsStackObjects`, etc)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The nil check is not necessary for these. Append checks both sides for nil." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we instead have the SDK apply these, internally? I.e., I would expect to see the dctx entries included in the span as first-class distributed correlations, not as span attributes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "nit: rename this in proto and update impl to `Search` to avoid stutter" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to order by `s.id`", + "reference": "is it necessary to order by id as a second ordering? this will take place only when several new slider items are created without reordering (position is then null). Wouldn't be better to recalculate position after creating a new item? (right now items with null in position behave differently in administration and on frontend)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "`ClaimFromRewardingFundBaseGas` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "How about modifying the NOGIL definition so that it only does anything if the thread safety flag (RDK_BUILD_THREADSAFE_SSS) is set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "blockheighter would be more clear" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This is so weird as a utility function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Why? What would happen if you did not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Unrelated bugfix for NPE." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "What if some extended the `AdminController` and had a check for the old option name? Could that be a valid use case?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `fetchRefreshSelectedEventsData` function.", + "reference": "This will be only available when data-manager is enabled, is there a fallback in case data manager is disabled?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Do you think we want to move the call to `generateWorkerServiceRecommendedActions` inside `RecommandedActions()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "The VUIDs in this area are not great, but I think `ValidateQueryPoolStride` should probably be skipped if the query pool was created with type `VK_QUERY_TYPE_PERFORMANCE_QUERY`. VUID-02828 might be a better fit, but again, the existing VUIDs step on each other so it requires a bit of interpretation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Iguess you should use ToDbKey here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "x.tbk is the \"index\" below, and is done in Start()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Do we already have a convention for this? If not, would we consider \"DataDog.IsAppInsights\". And then use \"DataDog.\" prefix for all this settings, environment variables etc..? Such settings are, essentially, public APIs because they may conflict with customer data. Regardless of that, AppInsights has an s at the end :)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error error error", + "reference": "this assignment is not necessary if the offsetof() is used in the configmap" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is for.", + "reference": "I'd rather leave a TODO here at least." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this be `resource`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))((()))((((((((((((((((((((((( code code code code code", + "reference": "Why does this become blocking for the CPU path? Shouldn't it remain independent of the GPU path?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", + "reference": "Do we need to change occurences where `setup` was called before?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "Is this TODO still valid? Or are we going to put this somewhere else later?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "We generally don't do parantheses in if conditions in Python. :) this could be better written as `if from_ts is None`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\")\")\")\"))\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "Odd that we'd set just element 299 of a 2000-byte buffer to null. But I see that this is the way it was before." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "ScoreFunc is not used in this PR. Maybe to add it later when needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "super nit: I think this might be easier to read as `requestHeadersFromResponseWriter`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Need to include \"common/base/Base.h\" in front of this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Changes in this file should go into a separate PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the token to the string. I don't think we need to add the token to the string, but I don't think we need to add the token to the string.", + "reference": "Please ensure that this will not start putting single quotes where double quotes are expected." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`ProvideConfig` was changed, looks like it will not compile for windows, and should be changed too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This does not look right, you're listing all private repositories.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "An OPTIONS request should respond from _any_ path? Seems weird to me..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the width and height here.", + "reference": "you need to add the content type" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Do we need to distinguish between these two processes? I'm thinking maybe we can have a list of processes and treat them all equally." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This is used only for out-of-line -- so yes this seems right to do for x64. Inlined is aligned separately at the end of prepare_for_clean_call(). There the ifdef is x86_64 or MACOS -- no ARM, why not? Also, please add || MACOS here to match the inlined." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `ZIPKIN_SPANS.TRACE_ID_HIGH.eq(ZIPKIN_ANNOTATIONS.TRACE_ID_HIGH))`", + "reference": "guess I'm wondering if this needs to be refactored to use Schema.joinCondition() or similar?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Does it make sense to restrict this option to `exec` only? You could add it specific to that subcommand using the `method_option`...method. There's an example of it for hosts in the `init` function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate method.", + "reference": "This is very expensive (lots of allocations, lots of data copying). Could we do something like check IndexOf('%') and bypass if no hit?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should be `WorldType.isDeadmanWorld(client.getWorldType())` to be inline with the other WorldType calls." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "do we also need to change `mlvl_confid` -> `mlvl_confidences`>" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I feel slightly that InterfaceExclude is not a clear name - bearing in mind that our config names are, to some extent, an external API. From an external point of view, a clearer name might be IPVSInterfaces. Then it would obviously make sense for the value to be something like 'kube-ipvs0', and it would be a matter of Felix's internal implementation that we choose to exclude those interfaces from our monitoring. Alternatively, if we want to keep this at a level that is more general than just IPVS, perhaps 'UnmonitoredInterfaces'? WDYT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This should be `re.search` with a `^` anchor added to the regex, as what we want here is really any path starting with something like `E:`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Since `IsKubernetesBuiltInResource` at L69 returns false due to lack `networking.istio.io/v1alpha3` in `builtInApiVersions` within `pkg/app/piped/cloudprovider/kubernetes/resourcekey.go`, it will never reach this point." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Does codecov not run this test? Not sure how else it would not be covered." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "can we add some sample of JSON_DATA format in the usage?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Using `Tracer.Instance` in here is problematic for testing It will likely cause some other tests to break I think - that's why we started passing in `IScopeManager` EDIT: I see you used `[TracerRestore]` - maybe that'll be enough!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "make all of these `static final` fields UPPER_SNAKE - they are constants." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to move the damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage damage", + "reference": "No possible chance for weird overflows here, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Or we could use a Float object to more clearly show as user-settable via non-null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "finalizedHeader should be saved in FinalizationManager when we have FinalizationBlockHash!= Keccak.Zero" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Not using ExactName: true would remove the need for manually adding workflow ID as it would be added automatically by Daisy. E.g. 'disk-importer-2-import-ovf-7mn7h' was created from diskImporterDiskName above even though only 'disk-importer-2' was specified. ExactName: true should be used for resources that shouldn't include any temp prefix/suffix, such as disks that will be permanently attached to a created instance. Scratch disk is not one of them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "If we support multi-index column later, we need to rename to fit the pandas' requirement." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "I'm not sure this is really needed. JSONValue type can be used the same as a map as far as operators go, including range. I'd leave this out for now unless there is a strong reason to keep it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "sorry for nitpicking but I would love a new line under this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "ChannelImplementation field naming is not clear, is it some kind of standard? Maybe it can be named ChannelID?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `actions` class.", + "reference": "Looks like there is a typo: `expireSnapshots` -> `removeFiles` or whatever name we go with." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Thanks for looking into this. I think it looks a bit strange to have this check inside the for loop. Wouldn't it also work to initialize `idxCurrentSort` with 0 instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Just a small ordering thing: Could you please bring `IMPORTANCE_HIGH` to the bottom and maybe even have one line between it and the Notification IDs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Should this be boost logged?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "What is the reason for doing expunge here? This method is purely for converting the timestamp." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "This calls sanitize twice if the name isn't valid." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `before_initialize` method. I don't think we should add this to the `set_default_flow` method.", + "reference": "Is there an equivalent that'd allow zero or one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Is it possible to update/re-evaluate entire metatask object for every repeat? If we decide/need to use a repeatWith resources in let us say labelSelector(bad example) then we would have to add another logic to update those properties." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "unnecessary conversion (from `unconvert`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));", + "reference": "typo in commit message `openening`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "User-code doesn't see the internal ADIOS headers anymore. This whole include block should just be `#include `" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "nit: I guess we can omit this (unless you had a reason to specify it)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode() || isSpokeLeafNode()", + "reference": "Why is Hub public?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "why is this deleted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe move that into a partial" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `TestBlockDAO` class.", + "reference": "Error return value of `dao.Stop` is not checked (from `errcheck`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this warning.", + "reference": "util.Warning()? Easier to say." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in the `trie` function.", + "reference": "this default is kinda superfluous (although i see it was already there before PR )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "How is this related?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm breaking one of the rules here, it feels like the right thing to do. Open to alternative suggestions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The use of `#should` was triggering an rspec depracation warning for me, which is why I switched this to the rspec 3 style." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Why are you setting the CacheChange as REQUESTED when it is not valid (it was erased from history)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `AnalyticsDashboardWidgetTopLevel.js`", + "reference": "`lodash` shouldn't be grouped under WordPress dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This needs to be public so that Avro can call it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "`Google*` shouldn't be under External dependencies - seems like ESlint is not properly recognizing that these are aliases to internal dependencies." + }, + { + "prediction": "should not raise an exception.", + "reference": "I think he meant the docstring in this constructor. yea we should fix" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "so.. this basically follows the pattern from JapaneseTokenizer, I think... but somehow I don't see where we defined ResourceScheme? We're not referencing the one in kuromoji, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed. I'm not sure why it's needed.", + "reference": "It would probably be better to do: const SecurityProtocolType Tls13 = (SecurityProtocolType)12288" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Similar to the above, put this setting back but keep the value as `'{}'`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "As discussed in chat - we should run this function within an app context which means that we'd already have a logger configured, and a connection to timescale set up" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "I'm curious about why this needed to be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "why did you remove `zip`? It is used!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is there any reason that we don't add a similar condition like `ChannelConditionTopic` to the channel?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "before php8 \"goto\" was a reserved word and was not allowed as part of the namespace. Now test checks for validity of plugin namespace according to PSR-4" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))((())((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "nit: I'm not sure it can be addressed in this diff, but it seems odd that NewOutbound supports TLS but NewSingleOutbound does not. As a somewhat naive user I would expect the only difference between these two APIs is how peers are chosen." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should close the response body when the response body is empty.", + "reference": "I would advise to enhance the test for the method `CallOneway` - we should have a test very similar to `TestCallSuccess`. We should test: - Success with response (even if it is callOneway) - Success with no response and empty payload - Errors" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the regex here.", + "reference": "We're already matching +. Not sure why this changed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Please add line breaks, so the line doesn't exceed 80 chars." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I initially thought (inccoreclty) this is a breaking change! The public api analyzer is a gift!" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I'm not sure how this one didn't segfault before." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Same points as in other test file." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Did you run gradlew tidy? Wildcard imports shouldn't be there, hence the question." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is this going to restrict the output to *ONLY* ports that are bound to vfio-pci? That's not what we discussed yesterday." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "Intention is to do the lookup here, I believe (where we can cache it). This would make the call non-pure function though. I'll confirm with lotus. ID addresses are the *only* addresses I expect to actually see here." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "electronic medical record file system (EMRFS)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Put this higher in the list, like after \"bind\", since I guess we're considering the max request body size to be kind of a native/fundamental feature, built directly into the vhosts." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "oh come on :(" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.", + "reference": "This is an incorrect change. The dialect spoken is an important part of the handshake and should be communicated to users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Remove as this is not needed anymore." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This new class is for checking that #4551 works correctly with PlantUML output too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Will this cause all certificates to be re-issued?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I think tmp is also leaked at the end of this loop if no error cases are encountered." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's a bug, but I think it's a bug.", + "reference": "The previous version didn't use `keyProjection` because the entire key must be projected. If the key is a struct of multiple columns, then projecting a subset of those columns can easily introduce key collisions that aren't in the original data." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the spaceId from the cache?", + "reference": "Why not use StatusOr? We can't ensure spaceId is greater than zero, especially when AdHocSchemaManager is used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Does it seem we only use that as the json-rpc client? Do we have any other choice? It's a little weird." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list list", + "reference": "Could you split this into multiple lines?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Doesn't the snapshot ID start off as null? It seems like we don't need to set it here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I wondered why `buffer` was passed into `LookupPath`. What is happening here? Is `buffer[:0]` equivalent to `[]V4TrieEntry{}`, and hence `buffer` isn't needed any more?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the state to the state table and move the state to the state table and the state table to the state table.", + "reference": "nit: Ideally we would would use this abstraction everywhere we need this translation. I believe it's needed in the mining worker and the storage and market connectors." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "need to fix the error message here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be fixed. I don't think it should be fixed.", + "reference": "Unsure of how to handle this one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "Will this.flowFinished verify with every finished state stated in Status.isStatusFinished method? If so, no need to verify isKilled." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "replace \"Child Workflow\" with \"any workflow\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if.IsSymlink else if.IsSymlink else if.IsSymlink else if.IsSymlink else else if.IsSymlink", + "reference": "Instead of showing the words \"symbolic link\" under the \"Size\" column, how about we introduce new icons for symbolic link to file and symbolic link to directory?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Please add back the description of the parameter" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Superfluous space inserted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Didn't fix the problem. `href=\"\"` for SVG will still result in `undefined` getting returned by this function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the test case.", + "reference": "This seems like a strange change... I wouldn't think that a change to access tags in the profiles would result in different bearings in this tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `appModuleHandler` class.", + "reference": "As isCaret is False by default, explicitly specifying isCaret=False here is not needed, and is perhaps a little confusing. I'd prefer that anywhere in the codebase that isCaret is only ever specified if it needs to be set to true. Mirroring that of isFocus for setNavigatorObject." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We can't freeze this and then add something to it in the next line. The `freeze` on line 43 is sufficient. If Rubocop flags this we need to exclude it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why is this needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the routes.", + "reference": "Why not put two other routes after this line (221)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "If FLAGS_meta_server_addrs is not empty, in which case \"toHosts\" return empty array?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "There is a function to output a \"JSONBool\" string. That would be a good start for finding uses. But maybe just have a look at where we decide whether it is a numerical or not, thus wrapping quotes around its value. Then you have it all I guess." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "oops, it should be `data._scol` so that it respects the expression stored in Series. Let me fix it quick." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")(((((()))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});});type;type;});});});});});});});});});});};};};};};};type;type;}];];];];];];];];];];];];];", + "reference": "Thanks for moving this up with the rest of the variables. Much tidier :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default payment per time. I don't think we should have a default payment per time, but I don't think we should have a default payment per time.", + "reference": "I think `Rate` is a more precise and concise term for `PaymentPerTime`." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\"))))))))))(((!!!!!!!!!!!))))))))))))))))))))))))))))!!!!!!!!!!!!))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "I think this should maybe be: var limit = input.IndexOfAny(new[] { '+', '-', ']' }, **posNext**); You pretty much want to ignore any sign that is before the \"M\". But, if there is a sign somewhere before the M, and also after the M, you'd want to be able to find the sign after the M, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "if `checkStockNotEmpty` returns a reponse, you must return it or your script will continue its execution." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `klogv2`", + "reference": "Any specific reason for this change? klog should work correctly here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to update the last_modified field.", + "reference": "we don't mention `last_modified` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "same deal about the global state maybe interfering as in ActionBrowseTagline" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.", + "reference": "so sweet to see a test as the first thing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should not be NULL, but I don't think it should be NULL.", + "reference": "usually when HTTP_PROXY=\"\" (empty), proxy should be disabled. could you set it to NULL when it's empty string?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Can you throw an exception if width or height are both null" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `HTTPSchemeHTTPS`", + "reference": "This is a breaking change. I guess these might have been intentionally exported." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "I don't think this is necessary. When options are used to set the split size in the Spark reader, it uses `TableProperties.SPLIT_SIZE` to pass it here. That should work for metadata tables as well, right? The situation that we need to handle in this PR is setting the default, like you had before. We just want to use a metadata split size so you can set it and not have the same split size used (by default) for both metadata and data scans." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "wait a sec, shouldn't this be `'*'`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a string.", + "reference": "It think you'll want the var for GMI import as well: daisy_workflows/ovf_import/create_gmi.wf.json (Unfortunately there's duplication between the two :/ )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Nit: Group this with the other commands by moving it down one line." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not supported yet?", + "reference": "I would like to emphasize that a user can use non-vectorized reads to handle this file so maybe something like \"Cannot perform a vectorized read of ParquetV2 File with encoding %s, disable vectorized reading with $param to read this table/file\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a parameter. I don't think it should be a parameter.", + "reference": "Maybe add `positional=False`. It does not need it more than the other parameters, but one must start somewhere." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Since we're here, can we use a template?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "saw you're also doing this in `test_types.py`: `spark = _spark_context()['test'].resources['spark'].resource_fn(None)` since `_spark_context()` uses `spark_session_local` won't the above break the tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`has(default)` i think is the preferred way of doing this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "always put a space after a comma" + }, + { + "prediction": "Please fix this issue.", + "reference": "@angmas1 move the else up, next to the closing bracket of the if block. Also, there is no need for the braces as your else statement contains only a single line. Make your if-else block similar to the block in lines 277-280." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "@AutomatedTester @davehunt thoughts on a new keyword argument?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `int maxSessionCount`", + "reference": "This change shouldn't be necessary for this PR. Please remove it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This variable is mostly unused, how about we make `NewTestCtx` return a pointer?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "What is the basis of this value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Nit: was this extra blank line added intentionally?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "nit: inconsistent spacing around =" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "We still need this import" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "We are pulling this because we removed \"groupID\" state and put it into the strategy implementations" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Is this file actually related to PCA?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this to `createEnableTracking`", + "reference": "See above, this should probably remain `isFirstAdmin`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why the change to make it public? The expression interface has the `TypeOf` method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "don't mind the snake cases in the test names. If there are in the test cases, it's fine IMO" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `IdentityManagerInterface` interface.", + "reference": "`Id` defines REST resource address and should not be in payload" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We can omit the underscore and just use `classwise`." + }, + { + "prediction": "This should be safe as the root category has to exist for a given context but I do not like fatal errors.", + "reference": "Why not throw an exception instead then?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Looks like this doesn't need to change. Can you revert this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "please import it like `from kinto.config import template`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.", + "reference": "There are lots of default value changed, not sure if it break the old behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "parameter should be called removeFromStaticNodes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "The handler will have an extra property in the marker to signal the implementation is in the provider, for the cases we want to add functionality, for example, custom implementations not in moto." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `update_column` method. I think it would be better to do this in the `update_column` method. That way, we don't have to do this in the `update_column` method, and we don't have to do this in the `update_column` method.", + "reference": "Is this method actually being used anywhere? If not, I think we should remove it." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))())(((((((((---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Thanks! I somehow lost this between my far too many branchs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "i think this should get put into its own file. This could start to grow :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you add a TODO for loading the tarball of the pause image into Docker?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a constant.", + "reference": "Is there any value in setting the process to null like this?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((( code code code code code code code code code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code.", + "reference": "This could be a good time to add a check that the prediction and target dimensions (except channel) agree?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())((())((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "The requirement that OP_isb is bb-final needs to be a rule for clients, just like the rule that syscalls and interrupts must be bb-final: i.e., please add it to the dr_register_bb_event() docs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "The translate library has a method to replace the variables." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "i don't think this test case is correct. in both cases inpalce=True returns nothing. We need to compare the ks. Also we probably need to make a copy of it. Otherwise you pollute the following \"ks\" because ks has been changed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "Any proposals how to make the naming somehow include the \"completed\" idea of this hook? `TlsHandshakeCompletedHook` or similar? Or using the `...Start/End...` scheme?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "it introduces a lot of complexity to the state, can we flush straightaway or create a two level flush store where the questions are read form unflushed data?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "There are two calls to getUrlFromRouteCache, but you're only urlencoding one of them. Is that intentional? Would it make more sense to do the url-encoding inside the getUrlFromRouteCache function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Maybe we can use `this.instance.getCell` with `topMost` flag to get `TD` element?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should log.Info(act.LoadProto(actPb))", + "reference": "Change this to Debug Level" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "I refactored the Aggregate, those are hard to read" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "This is now done in the after method, so this test won't pass any more." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if the user hasn't seen the contributor terms. I think we should add a check to check if the user hasn't seen the contributor terms.", + "reference": "What was the point of creating `user_block` if you're then not going to use it ;-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "@ueshin, I thought we can remove this entire file. Does that require some more works?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Just `return tokens.string[1:-1]` is enough" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "1 trailing blank lines detected." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Isn't this the default max width? In any case I would prefer to see these definitions in the css files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this thread-safe? (If not, and if the solution is to introduce locking, let's reconsider how we do the scheme changing instead...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Looks like this file has tabs instead of spaces." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Hmm should we clean up container resources before task resources here? or the order does not really matter here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())())(2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(2))))(2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),", + "reference": "Please undo this :wink:" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [8/80]
Line is too long. [8/80]", + "reference": "thanks for adding this missing association" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should I remove this in favor of the HttpsConnectionFilterOptions overload?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This shode be nullable, there alway sholud be at least one status in system, if not exist that mean data problme" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add JS file to unistall SW to avoid Cookie Cache Issues when Signin is not available.", + "reference": "Spaces not tabs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "To get the files inside a directory, please use `readDirStats()`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "might be worth to call these `Isolation` instead of containers here and when presented to the user -- docker/rkt, in addition to cgroups and namespaces, also provide image discovery and filesystem preparation; there's also the security context and probably 1-2 other small things" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the README file.", + "reference": "File is empty, consider removing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `None`.", + "reference": "This seems to return the registry_url. The more meaningful URL is the catalog URL, which is the URL the user specifies in `quilt3.login`. The username might also be as useful here if not more useful." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Was the addition of `GasPriceOracleAddress` here erroneous?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "I believe that you are going to have to do some work here to get the env var support for these values to still work correctly, otherwise they will get stored as :department instead of host_tags[:department]." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "How was this causing the exception?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "I still have issues with it loading Simplified Chinese by default over Japanese, since they also share characters and we're not sure if characters are different or not. As-is, this fixes Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese, but we're not sure if it'd still screw up Japanese text or not. I maintain that, in my opinion, Japanese should be the only script of this kind loaded by default (Because of Hiragana and Katakana, that aren't shared with any other script) and either variant of Chinese should be loaded only in their respective case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Isn't it better to stub AtomatonQuery and yield it here. IIRC it resolves simplest MTQ highlighting cases as nobrainer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not change the discount_percentage_vs_current_plan_annualized_perperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperperper", + "reference": "Line is too long. [96/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "My only concern with changing the node selector here is that someone else _could_ have built their own images for other platforms and set them to be used using the flag override on the controller, which in turn this change would break. Perhaps not changing the selector for acmesolver pods makes most sense, and then working on actually having support for Windows? wdyt?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why do we need interface `InnerObjectWithSelector`, I searched the usage with this field, it seems nowhere use `GetSelectorSpecs()` methods provided by `InnerObjectWithSelector`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we need this `init` here? We have already called the `InitContext` in `StartModule` directly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This `if` is not necessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "should we add a `mangle.json` mapping for this? We could reuse a property name that's only used on component or vnode objects right now, like `__s` (\"next state\")." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Please update the yard docs to indicate this new option." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the list of subnets. I don't think we should add this to the list of subnets. I don't think we should add this to the list of subnets. I don't think we should add this to the list of subnets. I think we should add this to the list of subnets in the list of subnets.", + "reference": "Can you provide an example in the godoc section on how to use this? From the implementation it looks like the AvailabilityZone field is required for example, otherwise it can fail / error, is that correct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "It would be great if this could be captured by a test." + }, + { + "prediction": "Should be not greater than NumberOfShards(512)/NumberOfHistoryNodes(4) * VisibilityTaskWorkerCount(10) divided by workflow distribution factor (2 at least).", + "reference": "1000 -> 100 maybe too much, 200 ish to 500ish maybe a good option" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Any reason we need to keep this package's `ChecksumAddress` type or can we get rid of it too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Above the one that was picked was the Button* prefix, and here it's the Header* prefix. Maybe the Button prefix is more general." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "I might prefer changing: public Block FindPendingBlock() => FindBlock(PendingHash, BlockTreeLookupOptions.None); public BlockHeader FindPendingHeader() => FindHeader(PendingHash, BlockTreeLookupOptions.None); in IBlockFinder, what do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the `ResourceApplyMode` field.", + "reference": "This is necessary due to a bug in 4.7. Follow HIVE-1561 for getting rid of it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Topic` model.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Some day (tm) I will also get rid of that one. But today is not that day..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `$assets = array_map(function($asset) { return $asset; });`", + "reference": "Add a space between if and opening parenthesis please (i.e. `if (`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: `rename` instead of `alias`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Per AWS docs EC instances have the root mounted at /dev/sda1. This label should be skipped." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I'm not sure it is a better way to address lose message, if wait here, edge controller cant process message, event from watching api-server will be lost yet, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Please keep the correct alignment, it seems broken now (at least in Github). Can you reverse the test (`if p.value_size is None`)? Also, do you want `6` when `p.value_size is None` or `x + 6`? Maybe, in that case, something like `lambda p, x: x + 6 + (0 if p.value_size is None else p.value_size)` would be easier to read. Or even easier: `lambda p, x: x + 6 + (p.value_size or 0)`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we make sure ECS service treats it as int64 as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `ReadOnlyEditBox` or `ReadOnlyEditBox`?", + "reference": "Please follow the naming convention for variables, i.e. `windowText`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "alias can be `cast`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Let's use `%zu` instead of casting to `uint64_t` and using `PRIu64`. The alternative is to change the type of `mmap_errors` to `uint64_t`, though I'd prefer not doing that because some 32-bit platforms might not provide atomic operation support for `uint64_t`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I recall there being a reason we had this one set only to suggeation. @carterkozak do you remember why? or is my memory getting corrupted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())(())((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This should now be made into `if (it->second.empty())`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Do we need to worry about a race condition on this decrement (@The-Compiler)? I'm not sure how the python callbacks work, so this might not need to be something to worry about." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Should these assert that the extracted `SpanContext` is remote?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i((((( i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "typo: allow low quality matches." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "At some point we need to condense down and refactor our \"configs\" as we have too many in too many places and we're starting to get more illegible code. No change necessary but calling out for future reference." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we add the `if label` conditional to this please?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `install_requires` file.", + "reference": "@thunterdb, can we increase the minimal version to almost the latest ones? I was thinking people will mostly use the latest version of mlflow" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value for autofill.", + "reference": "If the last argument is going to be removed, why would we add it to the API docs? Shouldn't it be private for internal use?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`Intermediates` or `Intermediate`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "This is not the right exception class. There is an InvalidSelectorException class that covers bad locators." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should logrus.Info(\"Only reconciling with datastore\")", + "reference": "If this code isn't needed, it should be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should the `doRequest` func be a method on the `connection` type instead of passing state from the type?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "we'll probably tackle these e2e tests at the end" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate test.", + "reference": "what is this address pointing to? what are we measuring here? I want to have a better understanding." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Would it be better to pass the dependency status as the parameter into the SQL string? In case the enum value is changed in the future, we don't need to change the code here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Hah I had `gorename` failing without this too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.", + "reference": "maybe prefix these with `appsec_` for consistency?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: this should be down further with the other github imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////)))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Why is this change necessary or related to the rest of the PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "Hm, I wonder if the `see:` prefix is even necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should be translated." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "I originally had this PR only changing the R package, but then ran into this error > Error: [LightGBM] [Fatal] Cannot change metric during training This is thrown even if you aren't actually CHANGING `metric`. I think the change here in `c_api` is closer to the desired behavior, only throwing an error if the parameter is being changed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "These changes are just to make cli_spec a little more readable for VS Code users, as there's a bug with the Ruby plugin's syntax highlighting when you use multi-line regex literals." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't the global pull secret by in the namespace of the hive-operator? It is part of the operand." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "kinesis-mock applies KINESIS_LATENCY to RegisterStreamConsumer actions so I added a sleep here." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" ( \" \" \" ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));", + "reference": "Only V1 or V3 is return from `getMetaVersionFromKV`. So where do we call `updateMetaV2ToV3`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think that V0 is missing here, which will prevent plugins that haven't been converted to work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the index.js file.", + "reference": "Should we remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the github.com/noxiouz/zapctx/ctxlog", + "reference": "Put on top of the import." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Analytics` module.", + "reference": "See above, this shouldn't be added." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this enum.", + "reference": "This'll likely get fixed upstream, we should let them deal with it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Somehow, this field does not seems useful for the exposed package api, only for the tests. Would you consider having an unexported field in `hostFactory func(context.Context,...libp2p.Option) (host.Host, error)` instead to be set only by a new helper function defined in export_test.go. This is just a suggestion, not a hard requirement for the PR approval." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `goBackInTime` function.", + "reference": "As a first argument to these function, please pass the date that should go forward/backward. Also please clarify what is \"n\" (possible values, unit) and what is timeDuration (possible values, unit, as from your code it seems to be \"day\", \"hours\", etc. but from your example it seems to be milliseconds)." + }, + { + "prediction": "import))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Are you sure you really need this code here? that script will be certainly run in NVDA's main thread, and core would have already called setLanguage." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "why is this changed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Should this be \"the new revision value\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "You have deleted :attribute" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.", + "reference": "The license header should be updated to the Apache one." + }, + { + "prediction": "IsCoreClr()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()", + "reference": "@zacharycmontoya Is there any way to distinguish a `SocketHttpHandler` from another `HttpMessageHandler` request?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Not sure about this one -- did you check somehow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is there a good reason to keep this at the `pe_ver_win` name now that it's per-host?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ProductFragmentPagerAdapter` class.", + "reference": "Not in the order of display : Front, Ingredient, Nutrition here (which is the right thing), Actually displayed: Front, Nutrition, Ingredients" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.", + "reference": "Why delete `StartTime`? This `StartTime` was used to avoid the PID was reused." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "My concern here, is that if the dump_puppet_log also throws then we will lose the data about the teardown_exception." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "Should it be `int64_t`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "is this value related to something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Add names to tuple elements ValueTask<(Keccak? Hash, AddTxResult? AddResult)>, should they both be nullable?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I think it might make more sense to do this in Name.upperCamel; it is the entry point for upper camel strings." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Huh? The point is that a cast isn't necessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "can we name it like `InstallV1Alpha1CRDs`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should rename this to \"hive.openshift.io/hiveutil-created\" or \"hive.openshift.io/hiveutil-created\" or \"hive.openshift.io/hiveutil-created\"", + "reference": "I need something to match when creating selectorsyncsets so added this label." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Isn't `nil` the default return value from an empty `rescue` clause? If that's correct, then we could just remove the `nil` line entirely as it doesn't serve a purpose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a cross-origin resource sharing (CORS)", + "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove obsolete indexes from the cache.", + "reference": "Wouldn't that cause the obsolete indexes to be downloaded over and over again? After all these are still stored in the repository." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We might want to move this logic to a Plain Old Ruby Object down the road. Not a blocker." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "move `this.toolbox_.position();` to just after line 1477. Context: the if statement on line 1472 checks whether this is a toolbox with categories, and if so it populates the toolbox. Positioning the toolbox is a reasonable followup to that, and means you don't need an extra if. You may also need to call `this.flyout_.position()` after line 1483, which is the equivalent for the non-category toolbox." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this. I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "Should the function above be.FirstOrDefault() instead? Otherwise, why check for null and tell ReSharper to ignore the fact that it can never be null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Let's not create new connection, but rather user `common.db` one" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can this use asset_path rather than defining an image_url helper?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Hindley-Milner signatures don't use literal types. They explusively use types. It's deal with that" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `PolicyRule` struct.", + "reference": "Could we just extend PolicyRule with more fields? It was originally designed as the struct required by openflow client, nested structs seem not helping. And for the name of the fields, initialism should be uppercase, OFID and NPName doesn't look good, then maybe FlowID, PolicyName.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to add a `json_last_error` to the `json_last_error` function.", + "reference": "I really dislike this alignment approach, as it makes identifying individual functions quite hard, but I kept consistent with the previous style. Since no sorting was evident, I pushed it to the end of the block. Meanwhile, is this supposed to be tested or meaningfully testable somehow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the future.", + "reference": "Could also consider modifying the ActiveExecution..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Does it make sense to change that to a custom error instead of `ValueError`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I guess this will need to change soon." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Restore this spacing - not sure why it has to be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "These defines cause issues in base.h leading to failing android builds. Locale independency is now set in multiple spots, in cmake and in base.h. The base.h uses feature test macros wrong. Feature test macros can be used to indicate that a feature should be made available. They do not guarantee that it is available. On the cmake side this is done by the check symbol macros (similar to what autoconf does). On the android side not. I would suggest removing this from base.h and define locale independent in gradle. It is available since android 21 I believe. Is there a way in gradle to set locale independent only if android api >= 21?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Why not delete these codes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "If pull message failed after some reties, we should ensure the storaged exit, otherwise it has risk to loss data." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "looks like you don't need to import first and count here anymore" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add visibility processor here.", + "reference": "FYI, visibility task processing is local only, meaning pushing something to local ES cluster / local archival endpoint" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This import can be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "1. Nit: We can have a general helper to identify if a region is pseudo region. We might already have one somewhere. 2. Does any type of ARN support FIPS? If not, we may just move this check in arn package?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "is this phrase completed in a next line? Or forgot to add... what?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`('train', 5)` and `('train', 1)` are actually the same." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Would it be too complicated to refactor `currLimit` to be an `int64`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Would it be more performant to just `include ::RSpec::Core::Pending` here? /cc @myronmarston" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to specify podnetworkchaos generation or empty.", + "reference": "Should be podiochaos?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good fix, but I don't think it's a good fix.", + "reference": "Is the `codecs.register(lambda name: None)` gracefully handled by codecs? The lambda is expected to return a tuple of functions (encoder, decoder, stream_reader, stream_writer) (or a CodecInfo object), according to the docs. I've only checked python's built-in help, though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if (!MeterProviderBuilderSdk.IsValidInstrumentName(metricStreamName)) {`", + "reference": "in this case, it could be either instrument name or the view name, which could be invalid. might be better if we can offer very specific message. (not blocking this, we can add this as a follow up,if needed)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'd rather just send the parameter twice than break encapsulation here. There's already precedence with webelement IDs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model.", + "reference": "You may put 'open-mmlab://res2net101_v1d_26w_4s' here. MMCV will be updated later." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "May be worth making this more specific, to avoid potential conflicts, maybe `pagespeedDashboardWidget`? Or `webVitalsDashboardWidget`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I guess this assignment is now redundant?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the blockNum to the backend group.", + "reference": "See above note re: blockNum synchronization." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "wonder if we could avoid doing named imports if we type aliased `backoff.Backoff` in the `.../agent/common/backoff` package?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Or maybe put into alphabetical order with the other #includes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This runs the entire duration of the program; this change is not needed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I don't feel well about the `ALWAYS_UPDATE` option   sounds like a workaround. I can imagine that some of the plugins want to observe all options. Maybe, in that case, we can reuse the `CONFIG_KEYS` that would return an empty array for observing all settings and `false` for disabling observing at all? I just thinking aloud - Like `CONFIG_KEYS` sounds reasonable. We could support and maintain it in the future, even after implementing the \"observability\" to the MetaManager then `ALWAYS_UPDATE`... I don't know :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "This is not a bug.", + "reference": "A \"tab difference\"? As in, there are tab characters somewhere? This disabling of clang-format for all the code here seems like overkill. Are you sure there's not some other solution? I don't really understand the problem though. Do you mean clang-format-diff?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Could you please leave the explicit imports?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we check for containsKey here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Exit successfully. We served the help the user wanted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Had to rename this because `InitialPackage()` already existed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Can we put this in a different helper?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to do a re re-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "I'm not sure where your 31 comes from? I see 15 here and 2 above for pc and flags, for 17 total beyond the SIMD." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "If you want, you could change this to `allowCors(response` (like in \"version\", above) to allow Cross-Origin Resource Sharing. I'm sort of wondering what's returned if no API terms of use are set." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Why do we need to override this if all we're doing is passing it up?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Just wondering whether it's safe to send all CQDs to the child compiler. As this missing CQD is causing trouble, maybe some other user CQDs that now get sent could also cause the statement to fail? Also, if I have a table with a nullable unique column, should I have to set this CQD to create another table like it, or should the CREATE TABLE LIKE work without the CQD?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "EARLIEST_TESTED_RELEASE might be slightly more clear" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "I think replacing `.*` with `\\s*` from after the hash makes sense, but not the rest of the changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "interesting.. did not know varint tag covered bool as well" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Could you please elaborate the reason for not using `gkc_summary` like the values above? I ask this, because I assume what we want to collect is a histogram of event loop latency, and we use `gkc_summary` for collecting histograms." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "getHash should be a public and without an `_` if used here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Unrelated to these changes -- we will probably want some special handling for genesis block validation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This is probably overkill since we don't actually need to pass this specific interface anywhere, but I don't mind it!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "@janos I moved this back here, to avoid having multiple add peer calls being handled. I think it's either this or a global lock across the whole function. I think this is a better approach, especially since `hive.Broadcast` is blocking. We can remove the map entry on errors if needed. LMKWYT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the `approve_link` to the `approve_response_path`.", + "reference": "Minor: can we put the conditional outside of the partial?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "We need to find something more efficient than this. We can probably just check the first element and assume the type list is consistent.." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "How \" via service code in response to event.\"? I don't think we'll get in the no schedule option to the release. We should probably wait for some customer feedback first to make sure we're addressing different event-triggers the best way" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change. I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "Please move unrelated formatting changes to their own PR (same with the resources.py file)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Make this a public attribute (remove the leading `_`) if you want to access it from the outside." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "this conditional is useless now so it should be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "`vecofstructs->size()` already returns a `uoffset_t`. So if you just change the type of `i`, you don't need any casts." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "Nit: Maybe merge this with the configProto check on line 208? Don't feel that strongly though, please keep separate if you prefer." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/(())", + "reference": "I know we already did this in 4.0 so carry on, but I'm facepalming here we should've made an overrided setMessageHandler that sets ismaster to true when hello is present. Esp in 4.0 where we already have some overrides written. We can keep going here and maybe open a ticket to some effect of that solution" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I believe we could use `link_to` here (although not super important). Also, we should internationalize this value. I'm not 100% sure what our process is for adding new UI strings these days (e.g. skip the specs that will fail if we add a new key to only one language, use Google Translate to translate the value for us, some other option)." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This was already in vkGetPhysicalDeviceDisplayProperties2KHR..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this. I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.", + "reference": "nit: I'd expect a public method called IsDockerEngineRunning to return a boolean yes/no, not the error message. Can we change either the return value or the name? Something like `CallDockerEngine`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a column.", + "reference": "If i remembered correctly, type_name is '{RESOURCE_TYPE}/{RESOURCE_NAME}', if type_name is 700 max then name cannot exceed that size" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "When calling functions with keyword arguments: please provide the arguments as keyword arguments, not positional arguments." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We may follow the argument order: conv_cfg, norm_cfg, act_cfg." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "`options['binary'] = WebDriver::Chrome.path` if set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "folly library should be put on the top." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "Do we have to restrict this to SVG elements? I think setting namespaced attributes on normal dom elements (while not as common) is still valid, so perhaps we can save some bytes by removing the `isSvg` check?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please add it to the `REMOVED_HOOKS` constant." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This variable needs `.v1` at the end of it, or the tests below need it. There are some test failures as a result" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a label for spammer. I don't think we should have a label for spammer, but I don't think we should have a label for spammer.", + "reference": "Is this access protected so that only admins can access this route?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "What happens if the minimum x coord is > 0? This will incorrectly set it as zero, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think you want to look at current pending + batchSize and if that is > o.maxp no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "Should this be `codes.Error`? `codes.Internal` was an error status before." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I don't think you need these lines." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "You didn't mean to export this, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Simple Notification **Service** (singular)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need the gateway config here.", + "reference": "Do we still need this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "We do have a disconnect between the privateMarkerTransactionFactory.getSender() call and the createPrivateMarkerTransaction() call. When the plugin receives the call to create the PMT it does not know what the sender was returned by the other call. At a minimum we need to pass in the sender to the second call. I would prefer that the plugin does the locking if that is necessary. If you are using random keys you don't have to lock! Besu could signal to the plugin when a PMT was un- or successfully added to the pool using a callback. Callback could be null if this is not needed. The plugin would have to be able to get the nonce for a certain key from besu. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "This is a bit inconsistent with the `ErrorStartHourGreaterThanEnd` in the previous file. Wouldn't `ErrorDefault``fit better here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it will revert the change @antoninbas did on purpose 05eee251c9c53400277def576f92d614ca234898" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: a switch perhaps?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this link.", + "reference": "Would it make sense for `opensearch_description_tag` to have default values for the title and href attributes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Just noticed this while debugging -- it's unlikely to be causing issues in practice." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to wait for the user to create an Analytics account.", + "reference": "That seems unrelated - did that fix a random test failure you noticed while working on this issue?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not possible to get the metadata from the table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This kind of concern should be handled in the `TableMetadata` update methods. This is similar to `metadata.rollbackTo`, which not only sets the current version, but also updates the table history. I think that all of those methods should add the current object's `file.location()` to the previous metadata location list, if it is non-null. That way, the caller never needs to remember to update it." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((((((((((((((((((((( code code code code code code code code code code code code code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code. code", + "reference": "We need to know why all the tensors are detached in `get_bboxed`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Unrelated but shouldn't this raise `attribute-defined-outside-init`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need create_no_window here.", + "reference": "I would rather no have this as a `kwarg` as it encourages \"growth\" which lead to an unweildy constructor in other classes. Let's add a method or property to take care of this instead as I think it's usage is going to be quite low." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,", + "reference": "You just changed my life :) I grew very attached to this safe nav approach when working with Groovy years ago `obj?.method`. Glad to see its now a part of Ruby!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "do you mean 'clearfix' class?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `connect` method.", + "reference": "`causalConsistency` is already defined on `SessionOptions`. We do not need to duplicate it here." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This should not be included since there are no code changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If all we need just response 200, then we could use `c.Status(http.StatusOK)` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should be checking for error here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `FormTabs::SECTION_OUTSIDE` class.", + "reference": "Put a space between `(array)` and `$this` and I'll merge it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "You could add this to stack.go, which has similar functions (to avoid yet another small file). None of these are likely to be implemented considering what TinyGo is designed for." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the NotificationHolder class.", + "reference": "the class names `NotificationHolder` and `NotificationsHolder` are fairly difficult to quickly tell apart, particularly since they are often used close to each other" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "Avoid wildcard imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Need to do this to unblock mockgen. The interface method needs to be public to be visible in another package. The right fix is to delete this test only interface method" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "same question here as I have on the other file regarding doing this check here vs L112 vs not at all" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Adding `// +build!windows` (as a separate line) will do the same for Windows. So while you are at it we might add it as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "this is used as important way of mocking for unit tests, FYI" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to muted_alpha.", + "reference": "Sorry, should have been clearer, I meant adding this to the ``Histogram`` options one line above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message. I don't think we should change the error message.", + "reference": "Just ignorance on my part, but what is the significance of the change from C23NHe2 to C23NHx2?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a param.Boolean(default=False, doc=\"\"\")", + "reference": "What about tuples or pandas series? Do we want to support lots of different types or force a single type?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Small thing, without the check above this will throw a NoNodeException if the path doesn't exist. Maybe this can be wrapped in a try/catch just for the NoNodeException, so that the more user-friendly message used above can be thrown instead: `throw new KeeperException.NoNodeException(\"No collection found at path: \" + path);` Just a thought, I'm not even sure it's worth it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a validation for `url_name_and_desc`", + "reference": "I don't know why this worked before, but we should be explicit on not verifying that a blank string (allowed as a way to remove a url/download_url) is a valid url as it is not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Do we want to raise an error here instead of warning? Or would it be better to just see if Bolt happens to succeed, and let it fail on it's own if it fails? I'd lean towards raising an error, but that's different from \"removing support\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This is kind of confusing with the other `filter_options`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Could the `deleteFromFavorites` happen when `head == nil` because it's not initialized yet somehow but not because TLF doesn't exist? I was concerned if this would make it possible in any way to have favorites seemingly deleted on a device while it's not actually happened on server." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "It doesn't look like this particular \"rowCount\" variable is used anywhere. I suppose we could delete it. The code change is harmless though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this here.", + "reference": "Hmm, probably we should instead write whatever `status` is returned instead of coding a special case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Could using the pointer-to-struct approach here cause confusion later? We've had several problems of that kind in the past. What does it mean if the struct is non-nil but its fields are nil? Is that even allowed? (libcalico-go question) Are there any validation requirements for this new rule addition; should it only be allowed if `Protocol == TCP`, for example?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [8/80]
Line is too long. [8/80]", + "reference": "why this recursive relationship definition?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be a snippet of the handler. This should be", + "reference": "More sentence, less list please. > Encoding of the handler. This field is optional. We don't need to mention exactly what it's used for because that list can expand (as it has already in this change)." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))(((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Not part of this PR, but should the section above say what the name of the metric is for each method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "there are changes that are upcoming to this section. For now, this works (to demo the usage of Gauge), and the changes to this section are coming as separate PRs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I'm not sure why it's needed.", + "reference": "This is equivalent to stdout. Why not just replace stdin with stdout in `IsProcessBackground`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should add_man_to_path(p_jmsg[\"compress_method\"]!= nullptr)", + "reference": "Rather than test for nullptr, just treat the pointer as a bool, i.e. `if(p_jmsg[\"compress_method\"])`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "Can we move the remaining code of this method to a new method? I don't like the `return;` here, we could try to replace it with an `if... else...` syntax. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.", + "reference": "nitpick: _and collections_" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "I believe these need to be explicitly initialized in `proxy_send_prepare`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is unnecessary. The declaration of `t0` on line 179 is still in scope inside the `except` block." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "The `border_color_`... properties don't support solid colors, not only this one. Maybe `@param solid_color` should be used instead of adding this note to every one of them?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the tests.", + "reference": "We don't need this file, we can use the one that is in the grid-ui directory" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "FYI: inlined this method in the internal review." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Werid, the checksum between this file and the one on branch `develop` is the same not sure why it's showing a diff" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the description here.", + "reference": "Prometheus doesn't have concept of Meter (like OTLP does).. Trying to see if this is a good approach to use the meter name as namespace, to avoid name collisions, when same instrument name is used across multiple instruments, from different Meter." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "The formatting of this is a bit strange; I'd suggest collapsing this back to a single line, and moving the `&&` to the beginning of the second line to meet the line length restriction." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( if______________________", + "reference": "One or the other should be non-NULL. If segments is NULL, the alloc above will have size zero, which we do not allow (there's no header): it should assert in debug build. So there should be asserts that one is non-NULL at the top, and if there really needs to be some kind of defensive check down here, it should cover the alloc too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm surprised rubocop isn't picking up singe quotes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need panic here. I don't think we need panic here.", + "reference": "Is this line still needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Maybe use specific values for all the watt.times fields? Even better, have a const for it at the top of the file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "nit: UNICODE_BRAILLE_TABLE or something might be a better name for this. IMO, braille-patterns.cti is a terrible name. This table allows Unicode braille characters to be used anywhere to produce raw dots." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.", + "reference": "Why are we removing the option to skip machine pool generation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `HttpStartLineHandler` class.", + "reference": "\"Request line\" here too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please remove this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should use `paginate_by_sql` instead of `paginate_by_sql`. I don't think we should use `paginate_by_sql` here.", + "reference": "Weird bug. Combining those joins and group calls was triggering AREL to generate the sql cache inside of will_paginate before the final call. This is a harmless workaround, but hints that will_paginate might becoming seriously deprecated." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This can be simplified as discussed before." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.", + "reference": "Does `internal` or `test` in the file name actually do anything here? Or is that just to show these functions are only for tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "does this boolean indicate unsafe serialization?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this file into the `core` folder.", + "reference": "Maybe rewrite to `Is only implemented for React Native`? (I assume that is the case)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Do we not need this in Java because Java *is* handling map responses?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "Maybe \"For configuring which scheduler messages can be received.\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to clear the entity manager if $batchesLimit > 0 and if $batchesLimit > 0 then we don't need to clear the entity manager.", + "reference": "It will stop working with orm, so this is not a good fix, Try using some method in a common interface" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "`s` is not necessarily the same as `sampler` - sampler could be null and this crazy lambda underneath falls back to something. So please use `s`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "This code is a bit confusing. Should HttpParameterType set to the original one or it is always BODY?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Why did this change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: `status` collides with imported package named `status`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "\"memory pressure could be decreased\" --> \"to avoid memory pressure\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it would make sense to fetch the cache values after deleting the listens and making sure they are what we expect." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I'm thinking about covering this change with the test. Can you do that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Not sure if it's a good idea to remove stop channel. If user cancels connection how will you stop pinger?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Could you please add a `TODO` here that we won't need `docker.AuthConfiguration` anymore when we migrate to SDK's pull image?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is there a scenario were we want to get an arbitrary set of blobs that don't share a common root?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you leave a note about why we are skipping regex tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This was the only caller of CreateRepo, so I inlined it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "As this is already a child of `auth`, I think we can shorten this to `path`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "This call should use element, not 0 I think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value here.", + "reference": "This is missing the definition of `fetch_until_empty_page` - it needs to go in the config section above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't think this one needs to be changed since the only previous path is already an absolute one." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Since we kept the original constructor we might not need this change now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not log log log.", + "reference": "There is already a log in `BaseMetastoreTableOperations` for this. It has the location, but not the table name. Maybe just add table name to that one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `jwtgo` file.", + "reference": "This should be in the last group." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\")\"", + "reference": "I believe you should either remove this or rename the PR. You can't change the behavior of the tracer (even to fix a bug) in a PR named \"unit test improvements\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "I've gone with this group name, however I'm open to suggestions on alternatives!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "should this be GOQUORUM" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think checkCoinbase is not skipping checking coinbase. Instead, true-> checking num(coinbase tx) = 1, false -> checking num(coinbase tx) = 0." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "same here, move it out" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can you elaborate on why you need different behavior depending on Tools being built independently or not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to redirect to admin_show_phase_path(id: @question.section.phase_id, section_id: @question.section.section_id, question_id: @question.id, edit: 'true')", + "reference": "because of the above if statement will requires both ex_save and guid_save to be true, this code will always return 'example answer'. This should be revised with `example_answer.present?` and `guidance.present?`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "why not context from stdlib?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `GenerateCRC32` method.", + "reference": "Just saw this and wasn't able to hold myself from renaming :-)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can we keep the other assertion too? I think it's helpful to ensure that the uninstall function was called too" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`warn_with` prefixes the message with `WARNING:`, right? So this will put `WARNING:` twice. It would be good to verify all the warnings look good after this change, given how easy it is to make a simple mistake like this :(." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "FYI In the message queue I use the term \"stamp\" to refer to the time-like mark associated with each message. It's opaque to the queue/pool and should make no difference if the stamps and age limit were converted to seconds. So this could then become `Stamper` with `CurrentStamp()` method, no reference to \"blocks\" or height etc. The wrapper struct could be `StampedMessage. The interpretation as block height is deferred to the user/constructor that hooks things up, the \"business logic\". This is just an observation, take or ignore as you wish." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we remove the `TODO` statement here? (as this is actually fixed in this PR)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((())))))))))))(((((()))))))))(((((((()))))))))((((((((((())))))))))(((((((()))))))((((((((((((()))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "m prefix no longer in code style" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "need to filter the entities in buffer as well" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please add spaces before and after the equals sign" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This file could also be cleaned up/deleted. But lets do this separately after ensuring all the event logging has been ported to the current logmxevent_traf.cpp file completely." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it, but I'm not sure if it's the best way to do it.", + "reference": ":thinking:, the line number here is the line of the example (`example.location`), that's probably why I finally chose to display the example title because it's what can be found on this line, and saying that the error is from there is confusing. But presenting the actual failures is indeed better, so maybe we can get the failure actual line number from the exception backtrace and then output two distinct lines for failures like this one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep keepalive when we start the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Whens the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts the service. Starts", + "reference": "We shouldn't add this as a new `kwarg` here. This should all be done on the options class" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Should this be `OS_VOLUME_SUPPORT` to match the symbol key names?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "In C, file scope variables are already initialized to 0 so the \"= NULL\" is redundant. Not a big deal." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "on line 40, the `relevantNode` can change and therefore the `doc` might change too for the lookup on line 43. I think this code should be moved to where the `doc` is actually being used" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "nit: just to be similar to others, can you change to interpolation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Would this make more sense as an option on an Issuer resource (specifically on the CA issuer) rather than as a flag? It's not ideal that we have a flag that _looks_ like it could be 'global' but is actually not IMO. Also, if Istio is reading the CSR object, is it possible for it to read the CA from the CSR itself too and append the two instead? Not sure if we ever decided whether to use annotations for this purpose @JoshVanL?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to use `SERVER_TIME_F` instead of `SERVER_TIME_F`.", + "reference": "Because this acts as a coordination point between client and server, it should go in core.py instead of const.py (so eventually the server could use it to guarantee that it delivers dates in the expected format)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "expected statement, found 'else' (and 1 more errors)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "IMO this doesn't need to be in the `kbfs` repo. And I don't like setting the byte. We can always compare with the randomly generated `TlfID`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.", + "reference": "What's the difference from ModuleName in `pkg/apis/meta/v1alpha1/types.go`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a bug, but I'm not sure if it's a bug or if it's a bug.", + "reference": "We shouldn't be changing this task as we are trying to break our dependency on it and switch to using the shipped version." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we have a low bar for generating out-of-line context switch, i.e., if we need save more than n (3?) simd or m (4) gprs we should go out-of-line? And it should be || instead &&. It seems the bar is still very high after this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Should the API have a dependency on the SDK?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "Is this a sometimes leaky test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It should be possible to create a test case that enter the loop. That would be a good enough test case for me. Have a look at the extern type inference test cases that already exist. Since you can just pick the type variables the extern type use, you should be able to create a conflict that requires this loop to fix." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "It might make sense to log this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [84/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nice touch since Google likes to change things every now and then." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I think it would be better to have a method that returns a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys to return a list of the keys", + "reference": "Thank you this is so much nicer than the old `Rails.configuration.branding['blah']['blah']['blah']` :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "nit: Would you mind alpha-sorting this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should check that the manifest is valid.", + "reference": "For my understanding, the DATA manifest & DELETE manifest could share the same read / write path so I think we could use the common reader+writer. Is there any other reason that we need to make them separate paths?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "that change should be sufficient for avoiding the override of contact_us_url helper. The one defined at the.yml it is within a hash so no problem should arise." + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a new line.", + "reference": "We actually had a discussion about this exactly in #3470, some languages seem to go for one, some for the other" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Is PHP the first dynamic MVVM language with grpc streaming support?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "the `if` isn't necessary here; it's safe to call `delete` on `nullptr`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.", + "reference": "Change if the method's name finally changes to `clear_history` as proposed elsewhere" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "can this one also be moved to the top of the file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a list of resources selected by this group. pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod pod", + "reference": "So if I understand this correctly the externalEntities should be computed and stored in GroupMember, while current code usage of GroupMemberPod will be migrated to GroupMember later?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the name here.", + "reference": "Don't we have tests to change after this breaking change? probably we're not using hard coded strings in our tests when we create a `Span`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the file name to something like \"bigquery-credentials.json\" or something like that.", + "reference": "will this fail if the env variable doesn't exist? Is this the preferred behaviour?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "bad line wrap" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "What does the `8` here represent? Can you give it a name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to print the urls.", + "reference": "`MPRester(os.environ[\"MP_API_KEY\"])` can be left simply as `MPRester()` and it will pick up the API key from the environment. What is the purpose of this file otherwise? Is it better suited for `dev_scripts`, or a test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]
Line is too long. [81/80]", + "reference": "Looks like there may be more changes to this file than intended?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "when message type is not expected, contine to next loop instead of return to finish infinite loop" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This change was not really intended but made by the linter of VS Code. And looking at other packages this looks like a best practise to place interal packages on the top and gh imports afterwards." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should delete the instanceID from the awsMachineSpec.", + "reference": "instanceID should stay the same for a AWSMachine?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to false.", + "reference": "Since this is a dict don't you want `False` or do we clean that up elsewhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "what's the reason you had to add the `host` argument to all `get_work` calls?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This will never be a dataset so we can simplify the code here" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This should be moved into the PrivacyBlockProcessor instead of adding the constructor here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: Remove \"insightfilestore\". I think \"insightstore\" is good enough and as I see we are using that name at other places too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It looks like you've removed `bisect_round_finished` but kept `bisect_round_started`. Seems a little odd that they aren't paired. Not sure if there's anything to do about that though..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "I'm not sure how to fix the lint and mypy warnings on this line. I could just ignore them, but I feel like the linter should know this exists." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `SKIP_SESSION` object.", + "reference": "why remove `Symbol`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove the `$%&()*` from this file.", + "reference": "Why are currency signs considered punctuation? They technically fall under the BMP range for Currency Symbols `\\u20A0-\\u20CF` (covered in `getUnicodeNonBmpRegExp`, which is itself a misnomer)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "You have forgotten a coma `,`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "For different datasets, we may want to save the images differently. Sometimes the datasets are categorized into several subfolders, and we want to keep it when saving visualization results, and sometimes we just want to save all images in `out_dir`. An argument may be added to control the behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "if `other` could have a guaranteed `0` byte in it, this whole `if` could be removed, and above you could just add `|| c2 == '\\0'` to get the same effect?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean. I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: can this be a primitive value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This maybe not what we want. If `rewrite` occurred before, `r.URL.Path` contains the result and we should use it. Otherwise `rewrite` middleware will disfunction when combining with `browser`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why change this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate file.", + "reference": "_nitpick_ Isn't it now actually NotLogFakeHttpExceptions**Error**Listener?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate resource definition.", + "reference": "Why not just look for the \"type\" property instead of creating a ResourceType property?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "should use `bc.config.Blockchain.ChainID`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "this doesn't need to know about NativeClient" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I know we discussed if we should add in the resource_name to the hash, and I actually don't think it's required. The violation hash was recently updated (not released) to include the violated rule, so when the next release goes out, user's findings will get updated. The resource name doesn't hurt to have here, but not required." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the surface_attach function.", + "reference": "The variable name is also misleading imo. The width from the buffer comes from `wl_shm_buffer_get_width` (or a similar EGL thing), which is what gets encoded into `surface->texture->width`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Why are you using these tags to carry these msids?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((()))))((((((())))))((((((())))))((((((())))))((((((()))))))((((((((())))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "flb_strdup() should do the work here. note: use Fluent Bit memory wrappers" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This line should be separated from the package declaration by one line as it is not the package description." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get rid of this test?", + "reference": "shadow: declaration of \"err\" shadows declaration at line 410 (from `govet`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe next time better to make separate PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "line 316 also handles this case, need to simplify the logic." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We used to have a simple check for bucket and object names, we then decided to remove it and rely on the backend service to check for the name. Is there any reason to add an empty name check now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Line too long" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This isn't aligned though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "it is mean -> it means PAAHead does not support test-time augmentation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import plugins from invenio.legacy.bibdocfile.registry", + "reference": "@lnielsen-cern thanks. I missed it :(" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do that.", + "reference": "@tofumatt, has it been changed intentionally? It doesn't seem to be required in IB, plus we haven't had `content-drilldown` before... If it has been changed intentionally, then should we update the `AnalyticsDashboardWidget` component to be use `content-drilldown` instead of `content-pages` as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nit: don't think an extra line is needed here; as retrying is an installed library and should be grouped with the rest of the installed library." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be done with care. I don't think it should be done with care. It should be done with care and the user is advised to perform these actions can do so.", + "reference": "This should be a bool" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "`if (llvm::dyn_cast_or_null(GetSwiftType(compiler_type).getPointer())`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The `generateVariantWorkloadManifests` function below relies on the config manifests specified in Git, but it was passed with the newly created canary's manifests where their name was updated." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "are this docs neccesary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((())))))))((((((((()))))))((((((((((((((()))))))((((((((((((", + "reference": "This change suppose to resolve issue #2968. `loss_weight` should be of length 2, the second entry is ignored." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is there an easy way to check for conflict suffix to avoid false positives here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`apply_prep.run_task` also seems like it can just use `@context.run_task`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to wait for all sections to load?", + "reference": "do you have any idea on how to fix it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this test?", + "reference": "You don't need to fix this (you've done so many iterations). But for next time, you can make this into a docstring so it'll have a nicer descriptive name when the tests are running." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "When does 'expiresAt' change? Do you need this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a constant.", + "reference": "There are enums for genders + `PLAYERSEX_LAST`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should this use the constants as well? Or intentionally covering the fact that the constants may change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The case of a negative size (= keep all elements) was not handled in this function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we should keep this dynamic config knob for operations purpose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Was this intentional? Perhaps this could be replaced with another way to check the offsets?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "the buckets are created via the stackset, customers don't need to provide them" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This doesn't have the same behavior as before. Maybe you want `reverse_merge` (and it either just works or we implement it on `Blacklight::Solr::Request`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This should be ` /$(ghc_find #{config[:ghc]})/ ` instead of ` /#{ghc_version}/ `, I think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.", + "reference": "We should deprecate this at some point." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a dict, but I don't think it should be a dict.", + "reference": "Move these two arguments before `loss_cls`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "[Super NIT]: i := serialNumber if i == 0 { i = mathrand.Int63n(...) }" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "-f short form here collided with --force. :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it is better to describe in the release note that `rerender()` was removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "We could also test this easily with `runpy.run_module`, what do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is it OK to fall through if it's not assignable? I was kind of surprised when the tests passed. Maybe one of the options below ends up working? For the new tests, this panics because `**not assignable uuid.UUID to []uint8**`. `uuid.UUID` is an array, not a slice." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I know this is after the fact but imo blockAPI should be blockMiningAPI." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "it's just a pattern as it was. SystemAttributeCode should have it's own definition and validate by it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Similar to the code block when we use prefix, maybe we can unify them to base?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I think `Duration` is useful for this action and we shouldn't ignore it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Everything below here can be replaced with `return s.err, len(p) - len(s.dataForWriting)`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Again, we can also guard `g_host_hip_lock_arrays.atomic`, can't we?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ImportSimpleProductCommandHandler` class.", + "reference": "Variable name should start from lowercase latter" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why has this timeout doubled?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "Should IptablesPostWriteCheckIntervalSecs be set back to its previous smaller value, if use of the iptables lock is disabled?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "You're missing a `return` here, but I'll add it :smile:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture texture atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas atlas", + "reference": "Can you try adding back this assertion? I'd like to assert that the texture has been created in the same context as the renderer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This won't work with Python 3 because it will already be a string. In that case we need to use `decode_header` from utils." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Why is the respond_to check here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if ($char === '\\\\' || preg_match('/\\w/', $char)) {` instead of `if ($char === '\\\\' || preg_match('/\\w/', $char)) {`", + "reference": "@orklah are you sure it's the same as `$chars[$i]`? It looks like `$i` is changed above, after `$char` assignment." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "I have a question? How do I construct a indexManager for testcase?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be done in a separate PR.", + "reference": "These checks aren't needed. See pluginmgr.c : opae_plugin_mgr_load_dflt_plugins( )." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query", + "reference": "Please take a care about prefixing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value.", + "reference": "this line doesn't match what the rest says" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Since it's not working for linux, maybe leave the!linux in there as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we remove the key-value pair entirely? Same for workflows in general. We have a \"sourceExists\" method that checks if a key is there if I remember correctly." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Unrelated bug fix" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We probably want to let the translation library handle the string replacement for these as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "should combine these 2 list (list_gossip and list_db) into just one list command, and show the discrepancy between the 2 if any." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What do you think about prefixing the Policy method names with `can_`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Based on the docs, credential process can return a key `SessionToken`" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "I think this if should be removed (see issue)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I would avoid importing `felix/ipsets` package because this package is the windows equivalent and should be at the same level of `felix/ipsets`. We could add linux specific dependencies into `felix/ipsets` later and it will break Windows build." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "nitpick: Please move this down to the other imports, as it's a Python stdlib import." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "\"for getting started guides\" reads a bit weird, like it's missing punctuation. Maybe just \"for a tutorial\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "This looks like a dead parameter -- maybe a copy and paste error. If it's truly unused, maybe you can open a separate PR to simply delete it, and then it's one less detail to worry about here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Nit: Should we add support for `int` and `uint` in the `values.New()` function? That would allow us to to handle all of these types in one case. Maybe there's a good reason why we don't do that already, but I'm not sure what it is." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "if you are not dealing with cache now, please revert these changes. On their own they make little sense" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Wearing my extra-douche-bag hat I would say not spaces on a blank line. Maybe at some point we could have some automated process remove these things. For now I would not bother changing it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ShowRemainTimeUpdateEvent` method. I think we should add this to the `ShowRemainTimeUpdateEvent` method.", + "reference": "I think it would be better to use an `ItemUpdatedEvent` like for the \"prefer streaming\" preference. We already have a ton of events that need to be handled in all list fragments that just do the same everywhere. I think we could even remove some of the existing events in the future." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to this table.", + "reference": "I think we have to manually write a down for this migration." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "I don't think we still need this check, but I'd leave it as an assertion for now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.", + "reference": "Since this may be the case, wondering if we should call the param `updated_at_i` or something so that we don't run into a problem distinguishing them down the road?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `App` class.", + "reference": "wondering why we need to join the paths here; seems evt.commandLine only takes whatever appExe is" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "1.not format code 2.failed but still continue? 3.\"UTF-8\" can changed to java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets.UTF_8.name()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I'm wondering if we should add this to a `utils` module in `astroid`. Porting the util to `pylint` doesn't make sense as we would need to duplicate the globals that are being used in the function, but importing from `brain` also feels weird. @Pierre-Sassoulas Do you have an opinion?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to wait for the requestProcessingStopping?", + "reference": "This seems different than what we do for corrupted request headers. I would like to determine the correct behavior and consolidate this logic." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Please make the change in the CAI inventory, rather than changing the scanner." + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new class to this class.", + "reference": "adding this `abstract` is a breaking API change. Even though I agree it makes perfect sense to have it, we can't break this API until PMD 7.0.0. We should revert this particular change. We could make a reminder ticket like we did with #463 for 6.0.0" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Plan` table. I don't think we should add this to the `Plan` table. I think we should add it to the `Plan` table.", + "reference": "This is following the existing convention, but I'm not sure the convention is a good one. I think it would be better to have one shared example group: - It means we don't need to add new example groups twice every time. - If the shared example group looks large, that makes it more obvious that our team models have too much shared behavior. I don't want to do anything about this right now (I'm pretty sure I can wipe out this shared example group when I change team plans), but it's good to keep in mind." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "I do not think we need to do a source code change to handle this. We could set the subnetwork to default to /32 (/128 for ipv6 ipv4-mapped)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "It looks good overall! The only issue I have is that the description string is now duplicated twice right? Once in the struct and once in the parameter string? Maybe let's pass the struct to the command so that `ostree_option_context_parse` can set it as the summary? Similar to what we do in rpm-ostree." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend.end.end.end.end.end.end.get.get.get.get.get.get", + "reference": "This states very clearly that this is a derivative of Chrome and not Chromium. Do we need to extract an abstract `ChromiumCommandExecutor` and have both Edge and Chrome derive from that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "it seems to me, the issue lies on `isEnum()` itself, returning false for something that is an enum. I'd rather change it there than here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the handlers to a separate class.", + "reference": "Please use `{}` instead of `dict()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `react-intersection-observer.js`", + "reference": "I have concerns about using this in more places before #3278 - I'll take a look at that again shortly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test. I don't think we should add this to the test.", + "reference": "new field needs to be asserted" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `self->lastLogIdSent_ = self->logIdToSend_;`", + "reference": "when send log failed, why update the last sent log id?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "what was the problem with the previous order? `prepend` comes conceptually before `append`, i.e. `insert before` should be before `insert after`, I think" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why is this necessary? Could you provide some context?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is there a recommended quote style for attributes? I see single and double here, double further down." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Please use an atomic bool." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the `WebHelpers` class.", + "reference": "Consider naming this class `SpanExtensions` to follow C# conventions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "FYI @lucaspimentel and @colin-higgins since you have already approved, I wanted to point out this required change. By fixing `FrameworkDescription` to use the correct logger, it created a cycle between these two static constructors, so I'm removing this log line and delaying it to when it's actually constructed later in the Tracer. Let me know if you find that acceptable or have any suggestions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `Beaker::AwsSdk` module.", + "reference": "Ah, so we are going to need to update node/host files for this to work?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to log the container id?", + "reference": "This code is new and not tested well. While we may drop the log level before we ship 4.0, right now this is extremely helpful to users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I think it would be better to move this to the `observation.destroy` method in the `observation.destroy` method.", + "reference": "used named path (`proposals_path`) instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Am I misreading something, or is there a mismatched parenthesis here? Please let me know whether or not this is cause for concern -- just wanted to be totally sure before merging, since I can't test this from here. Thanks!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I think it would be better to use `UpdateSpanWithErr(span, treq.Service, resSvcName)` instead of `UpdateSpanWithErr(span, treq.Service, resSvcName)`", + "reference": "Might we want a hook to allow emitting metrics or logs in the case of a permitted empty service header response (or similar UpdateSpanWithErr on empty service header in response if strict enforcement is desired by the caller)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the protocol to https if it's not set. I don't think we should change the protocol to https if it's not set.", + "reference": "if using dict.get, this could just be `kwargs.get('protocol', 'https')`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Add docs to the new methods here" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "what does it mean enabled?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Getting an error when calling with db.execSQL (in sqlcipher 4.3.0, pragma returns ok)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Dashboard` class.", + "reference": "Maybe we could remove `\" \" + ctx.Tr(\"dashboard\")` completely?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Let's add some assertions here to ensure we don't panic. Length of results. Conditionally cast second result to error." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?", + "reference": "Where did we take this default from?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Let's move these down to be after all required arguments rather than in between." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `if (_sharedStringMap!= null) {` if (_sharedStringMap!= null) { _sharedStringMap.Clear(); } else { _sharedStringMap.Clear(); }", + "reference": "Should we just null the Map and let the GC handle the memory? Clearing just removes items, but not capacity, so this would leave some memory on the table." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "did you mean to delete this line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Should we use logger instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it would be preferred to do `expect(helper).to be_analytics`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Actually, I think it's okay to just change to `if isinstance(key, (str)) or is_list_like(key):` and `key = list(key) if is_list_like(key) else key` for simplicity for now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "If there any other tests, I would make it optional there also." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the routes.rb file.", + "reference": "This can be removed too, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "If you're going to allow people to specify multiple SMTP servers, you should also properly export/import them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: Can we prefix these variables with `AspNetCore`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Can this also include a quick test for transpiling by name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this struct in favor of `SessionStats` in favor of `SessionStats` in favor of `SessionStats` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of `SessionInfo` in favor of`", + "reference": "This TODO can be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "can we make tabAccessibilityIdentifier = null as default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Should we print this error?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "For which reason do we need to convert this to int here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "FWIW, wondering if the error is interesting here (I actually arrived at this code initially to change `supportsFreezer()` to return a `bool`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Does this still need to be a partial? is the intention down the line to move back towards a conditionally different title?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "seems like `RegistryURL` is missing? Same for a few other places that create `archer.Environment` below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this import should be moved to the top of the file.", + "reference": "Are these imports needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think you can remove the `(isIE11? it.skip : it)(` above, if you're going to skip the test this way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not do that. I think we should not do that. I think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "IMO we should instead fix the above call to do `long actualChecksumIn = Long.reverseBytes(in.readLong());` to get the actual checksum value? This way the below error message would also be correct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think we also need something similar for `rebuild-index`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the default config path here.", + "reference": "I think convention is snake case for import naming?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN", + "reference": "i think haspk is false?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "you should add this to the cover command too (but let's have a more general convo about whether it's a flag or config option)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "instead of passing in pointer to empty struct, we should make it optional and support passing nil and use default cfg if it is nil." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "A fair bit faster, although still not great, hence also adding a hashkey." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If we're going to leave this in here, how about we at least pull it into partial?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This `context` is used correctly, there is nothing left TO DO." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "If `docs` is an empty array there will be an error" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is it really necessary to have the user specify this, or can the reverse proxy infer QUIC from the upstream's Alt-Svc headers?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "just remove the entire variable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe we should put that in the option description?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid key?", + "reference": "Why do we need to make this optional? Isn't the idea of the builder that if you don't need this value you just don't call the `keyFilePath ` method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "Shall we do the same for ORC and Avro?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Should be a space between line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "if not behind interface then equally we can use SecureRandom.GetBytes directly, otherwise let us push it behind ISecureRandom so we can test with this class wherever used" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a link_to video_tutorial. It's not a good idea to add a link_to video_tutorial.", + "reference": "Probably will undo this change for now, as I'm just targeting Weekly Iteration in this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Unused parameter warning? How comes we did not catch that before? In any case please open another PR for this." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))())(((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "I recommend move all openimage related logic to a new function" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the Cgroup struct.", + "reference": "We shouldn't have a bool for this. If there is a path passed, then we use it. Resource may or may not be empty." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I like how you used the count on the translate call to handle this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "Do we need to do this from the outside, or is there a spot in the handler code where we can do this automatically? (I haven't studied it closely yet... just wondering if you've already thought it through or if it's worth taking a closer look)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this test.", + "reference": "[Checkstyle] INFO: Using the '._' form of import should be avoided - java.util._." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the settings.py file.", + "reference": "So, why everything is in memory but the permission backend?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Are you sure it should be null and not an empty List?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]))]", + "reference": "Unfortunately I think the assumption of \"empty\" means the default dependency section is not correct. For a project.json file the default dependencies section is a shared section between all the different target frameworks and our TargetGroup being empty may map to many different target frameworks so they aren't really equated." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "This test was verifying the wrong thing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `buildMuon()` function.", + "reference": "pls pr a name change fro muon here too separately." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be done in the `InitAppOpts` function.", + "reference": "nit: we can use `defer opts.spinner.Stop(\"Error!\")` after l.180 to make it slightly neater" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));;;;;;;;););););););););););););;;;;;;););););););););););););););;;;;;;;;;;);););););););;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "This is declared in the wrong block" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should check if message is sync or not.", + "reference": "In fact it would be useful for debug, i prefer combine them into one debug level log." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "We would need to localize them eventually too, just FYI" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "It looks like the proto code needs to change the function name from set_name to set_type to be consistent." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "I think we can avoid using this pattern for this use case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Could you please change this to `#ifndef __linux__`? That's when we use our own implementation instead of `posix_spawnp`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Nit: put the `&&` on the previous line so that a reader knows that there's more to the statement at a casual glance." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Technically the \"right\" variables to use would be the ones in `libgit/autogit_node_wrappers.go\", which define how the tlf types map to subdirs for autogit specifically. (They would have to be exported.) But this is fine too I guess, just a little dirtier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `send_proposal_email` method.", + "reference": "Should there be a template or something associated with this email? Right now it's identical to `notification_for_approver`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Doctrine\\ORM\\EntityManager $em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager(); $em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager(); $em = $this->getDoctrine()->getManager(); $em->createQueryBuilder() ->select('s') ->from(SliderItem::class,'s') ->where('s.domainId = :selectedDomainId') ->where('s.domainId = :selectedDomainId') ->where('s.domainId = :selectedDomainId')", + "reference": "i hope there is some extension in phpstan for this" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "We don't store empty dictionary entries anymore: they bring no benefits, only trouble." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Optional: This function is C++ specific and could be declared as `static`." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "we can't remove functions as that would introduce backward compatibility issues in our java client. So we should also have a function with the original arguments: ` public Roles getRoles(String domainName, Boolean members) { return getRoles(domainName, members, null, null); } ` For the Go client we don't have a wrapper so no option but to update your client code as necessary, but for java we have the wrapper thus we always maintain backward compatibility" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I'd recommend keeping this in `warn_deprecation` and not adding an override of `warn`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I think we should use a `blitz` bin instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Why not make the ``derived_vdims`` flag (or similar, ``validate_vdims`` maybe?) an explicit argument to ``validate``?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "was it not possible to do this at the filter or porx driver layer? We typically try to avoid driver-specific things in the SDK layer" + }, + { + "prediction": "This file should not be included in this PR.", + "reference": "please update the year. it can be setup in intellij template." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.", + "reference": "what's the use-case for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "nit: `as_index must be an boolean` -> `as_index must be a boolean`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this method.", + "reference": "What is the goal of that method? And what are `$currentVersion` and `$newVersion`? Are they Thelia or Module version? :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to `AwsS3Multipart.js`", + "reference": "Is there an advantage to this vs setting `this.version` in the constructor? Cleaner this way, at the top?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid url?", + "reference": "Fix for URISyntaxException." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate logrus for routeUpd.Dst and logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) if routeUpd.Dst == nil { logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst).Debug(\"Ignoring route with no destination\") } else { logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) } logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst)", + "reference": "Would be good to UT this case" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the module.", + "reference": "Why we need to add this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
Space inside { missing.
Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This is ok to change since I believe that these were added just in main and not in public release." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `AuditLogsOrDie` method.", + "reference": "Not needed in this PR, just want to make sure people think about this (maybe make an issue)? This is a lot of strings in a row. It will be hard/impossible for someone reading the code to see that everything is in the correct position. I recommend creating a struct instead of passing seven strings in a row. A similar problem exists on most of the `MakeFoo(...)` style methods in this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `_issueLogJsonWriter.CloseResults()` method.", + "reference": "_jaw drops_ I would have sworn I wrote those lines. Good catch." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "This needs to be tested." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I believe you're missing the comparison after 'be'" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "move 103~105 to in front of 97?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a new file.", + "reference": "Lots of unnecessary imports left in this file." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Does this actually produce different code?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return undefined here. I don't think we should return undefined here.", + "reference": "This should account for whitespace. Simply putting `.trim()` on the attribute value should do." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't think we need these. Simpler just to put `routetable.TargetType...` inline below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Nested if statement. You can merge both statements nested together to create one" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Nitpick: add a space after the comma. Also, we should consider that the format of the version could change in the future so we could get something that is not a parsable integer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "For your reference in future, I sugguest to use the `ASSERT_*` family." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `fmt/format.h` instead of `fmt/format.h`.", + "reference": "no need to import `fmt/format.h` here since the `KimInit` class is derived from `Pointers`. Any class derived from `Pointers` can assumed that `lmptype.h`, `mpi.h`, `cstddef`, `cstdio`, `string`, `utils.h` and `fmt/format.h` are already included through `pointers.h`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the package list. I don't think we should add this to the package list.", + "reference": "Can we have prefix of `OPENEBS_IO` e.g.: `OPENEBS_IO_INSTANCE_NAME`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Might as well fix these bare returns by making them `return errors.New(...` directly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "we can use import here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `yarpc-test`", + "reference": "thx for removing these" + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a", + "reference": "I snuck this one in as well as checkstyle crashing (on files from resources) caused an unfinished xml to be written, and it wasn't obvious where that XML was" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "How is this different than \"good case\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the client.", + "reference": "the last parameter name should be `serviceName` as is in the implementation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "@ftomassetti - okay, this is a little meh." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Note, changed initial capitalisation of this for consistency. Can do it the other way around too if that'd be better. :wink:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "hey, aren't we supposed to be passing in two parameters here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "please keep alphabetical ordering :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Selenium must compile against Java 6. Revert this line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "what is that `\"\"`, the adapterType? can you add `\"\" /* adapterType */`... in other places as well... might be cleaner if it's a pointer or some varargs at the end but don't have any strong preference.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "This check is a little odd, and will still mess up with empty strings `''` because empty string is falsy. Can we change this to `|| _this.getValue(path) == null`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Just a minor suggestion: If you `parseInt` when you access the attribute then you shouldn't have to do it twice in the ternary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This change in particular is strange. I'm not sure why it would now be necessary. The previous default would've been true, and the default behavior without a new net-ssh version should be unchanged." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `bool $autoEndOnErrors = false;`", + "reference": "Why is that? Should be redundant as the default value exists." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Are all fields beginning with \"Debug\" automatically `;local`? (I guess so, but just checking.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `UpdateSchema` interface.", + "reference": "While I think it makes sense to update the mapping programmatically, I don't see much value in exposing it as part of the table API. We want to keep the Table API small, so if we can handle this by using a separate API that consumes and produces JSON, then that is preferred. Also, we may have more than one mapping in the future, so keeping this decoupled also helps out for those use cases. For now, let's build a utility class to perform these updates. We can always add this to the public API later if we choose to." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We would want ssmp to wake up every 3 seconds if there are no other requests to it and do some cleanup tasks. So, it is not clear why do you want to set this to 0." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Is this really necessary? I would expect these types to be included with the loop below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "You could do span and it's magic of typecast to int for better efficiency" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Looks like you've covered `-webkit-transform`, but what about `-ms-transform`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is there something missing from the message here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Hmm, what does this syntax mean?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "should this be callerTypeTask?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `plan.administerable_by?` method in the `plan.administerable_by?` class.", + "reference": "Currently update is set as @plan.editable_by?(@user.id) Which one is the correct behavior? I can see a case for only owners/co-owners to be able to set visibility, test status, and other plan details" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Maybe make it configurable? Or store the actual level index in DB, making this binary search obsolete?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Nit: this file doesn't need to change. Can you revert this to avoid git conflicts?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "There's no reason for this to be a callback now technically but as per our tech decision, we want all handlers to use `useCallback` now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the hash to the hash.", + "reference": "This isn't strictly part of this PR, but could you move `multiSigString` from `crypto/multisig.go` into this list of `HashID` values? Now that we have other things being hashed into addresses (specifically, these new logic addresses), it's important that the hash input for multisig addrs is domain-separated from logic addresses." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this test.", + "reference": "nit: you could have named it just \"TestCase\" (if django's TestCase was imported differently)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "the bridge here isn't defined as an accessor / reader to try mask it better. So you need to directly call the iVar `@bridge` here." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "All the callers of `ExtractSomeIfAny`, always pass `true` to `synthetic_value`. Can we get rid of the extra argument?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Better to use the absolute path." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "this is 16 hours, is that enough?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This is a helper method to cut down on boiler plate. This is a helper method to cut down on boiler plate.", + "reference": "removing boilerplate. You could also add a `StartSpan` with varargs to inline string attributes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Can you replace these single letter variables with full names?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate file.", + "reference": "At first I wasn't sure, but now I think I'm sold on making PrepareRequest an action over adding a state object to the context." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Would it be too greedy to preg_replace `VuFind (\\d+\\.?)+` with `'VuFind '. $this->to` anywhere in the string? This would update something like 'Finna (VuFind 7.1.0)' as well. Just a thought, please disregard if you'd like to keep it as is." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC(LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "BTW for brevity, you can remove `getZkStateReader().` here and elsewhere since ZkController has a convenience method for the cluster state." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If there are no manifests, then entries should be `CloseableIterable.empty()`, not the manifest iterable. That doesn't need to be closeable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test suite.", + "reference": "this class should be named `ArrayInitializationVerbosenessTest` to work" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `update_logs` method. I don't think we should do this in the `update_logs` method.", + "reference": "Do we want to allow users to disable `console` as well? The schema currently says that it only permits a hash for `console`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.", + "reference": "It would be very helpful to describe succinctly either inline or by linking to an issue going into depth why each test is not working. If we merge like this your knowledge of what is going on is lost and other people in the code need to do a ton of reading before understanding when/how/if we should unskip." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "As this is a `useEffect` this could be a cause for concern! Note that `useEffect` re-runs when a dependency changes **not** when a dependency is truthy (the previous code does look a bit like it's expecting that)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Should we be doing this with `make_unique` or something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "we don't want to set default values for this. Since it is the actual email, we want to make sure we are always passing in the `user` and `proposal`. we have a default value of `nil` for modifier because sometimes will update a proposal via `rails console` in which case there will be no recorded modifier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Yes this import was in the wrong place, but should ideally be in the first list of imports (among `go/build`, `go/token`, etc.). You may move it there, or just revert this change as it's actually unrelated." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(end(endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend", + "reference": "It's unnecessary to duplicate the `name`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "this was a mistake when adding phpstan strict plugin" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this condition is necessary.", + "reference": "Nit: I think it should be `to handle` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Please don't make unrelated changes or let your tools make unrelated changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "`numAccounts` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove the plugin from our internal container. I don't think we should remove the plugin from our internal container.", + "reference": "Is the ID correctly normalized at this point?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "if 0 is a special constant meaning \"no limit\" let's make it a constant and name it correctly :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Curious about the reason behind this change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add new block to online storage.", + "reference": "wait, i thought the cborstore was for state tree?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This logic is now duplicated here and in `_delete_temporary_files`... Maybe do it all at once - find temp files, delete them, and fix the logical keys?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to care for this. I don't think we need to care for this, but I don't think we should care for this.", + "reference": "How about name it with NullResponseTypeProcessor" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Maybe `Log::Fatal` here? `[LightGBM] [Fatal] Check failed: feat_is_unconstrained at...` (and kernel death in case of Jupyter Notebook) seems to be not so informative and user-friendly." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Not sure I like the name ``_apply``. Even though ``_process`` is supposed to process elements already, how about ``_process_element`` which processes elements, *excluding* Overlays/NdOverlays." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Let's use this constant when ASG is created as well (currently hardcoded)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Oh is `bucket` actually higher cardinality than `eventname`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "You can't rely on QtWebEngine being available - but why do you need to import this here at all?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "How did you determine these - and how can we be confident that nothing is missing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the list of books.", + "reference": "What is this page going to do that is different than the products index we already have?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Couldn't you just write this as an if/else or a guard clause like on line 87? Just seems a bit weird doing this conditional assignment for essentially an if/else." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this intended to be here? Seems it belongs to a different PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should change the color here.", + "reference": "These changes, while harmless, were no longer needed with newer versions of System.Console thanks to @ianhays" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `aws.exceptions.NoRegionError` or `aws.exceptions.NoRegionError`?", + "reference": "Umm... this isn't relevant to this PR" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "While All make some sense here it doesn't make a lot of sense in the SkipOnFramework context. I wonder if we really need to expose anything more here. You can just blindly use 0." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Actually, this is not correct. Package `cmd/bee` doe snot have any notion of commands or even libraries used for them. It is as simple as possible, just calling the function from `cmd/bee/cmd` which actually implements commands." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This change is causing tests to fail because users sits at `/app/users`, not `/app/admin/users`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best option.", + "reference": "Could you provide more information on what exactly each of those three options do?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate file.", + "reference": "Why this line break?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `apiextensions` as well.", + "reference": "We're importing this twice with different aliases." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We should avoid adding a pandera dependency to Dagster itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `permission.permissions.length` method.", + "reference": "Can be replaced with `org.jkiss.utils.ArrayUtils#add`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ````", + "reference": "While we're here, this line (and a few others) should be `customThreadPool.submit(() -> IOUtils.closeQuietly(overseer);` I have no idea why we're creating a collection and a stream for a single object." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should these restrictions also be reflected in the API docs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "What about the request headers if someone uses `request_header`? :thinking:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the future.", + "reference": "Verify that external-dns allows setting this parameter multiple times (that it's not \"last one wins\")." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe 2 host/ip values could be used in the example?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "We're only testing `RateLimiter.Allowed(Span)`, so I think we can use a mock `ITraceContext` instead of a real `Tracer` or `TraceContext`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "IMO, this is the wrong way to associate a model with a trainer... Why the string when you actually have a trainer object?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));........););););;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Wondering if we can directly put types here & for other similar ledger_processor items like rai::block_type::state" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to remove packs from the repository.", + "reference": "As `DeleteFiles` is not only used for prune this function deserves its own file. Maybe something like `delete_files.go` or `parallel.go`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "It should be simplified character. `` -> ``" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool, but I don't think it should be a bool.", + "reference": "I am pretty sure it breaks the visitor pattern, visitor should have no knowledge about the structure of what it is visiting or control over visiting mechanism" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "'A' instead of 'An' here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Can you flip it back (here and in other places)? It is more natural to represent \"10 seconds\" as `10 * time.Second`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the output to an array.", + "reference": "Why was this necessary? You should just use the `dask_classifier` defined below this. With this change, you'd only be doing the local predict on arrays each time, but we want to test on all of DataFrame, Array, and sparse matrix." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a link_to here.", + "reference": "To me, this is sort of weird to have a completely separate page for this. Can we extract the different stuff (github, videos, downloads) presentation from the top of `app/views/purchases/show.html.erb` and reuse it on this page. I worry that we'll change things with fulfillment or copy and have to change it in multiple places." + }, + { + "prediction": "import androidx.appcompat.appcompat.AlertDialog;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Please revert the lines above. Not touching unrelated code keeps the git history clean." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a new version.", + "reference": "`short_version` and `version_info`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the stats in the state change.", + "reference": "This is supposed to be `status`. Why did you change this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import this package. I don't think we need to import this package.", + "reference": "I will change all of these at some point next week." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I made this change because, while trying to debug, in Visual Studio, the `IntegrationSignatureTests`, this property getter was hit and interfered with my ability to complete the debugging." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: `\"Unexpected error while calculating: unable to convert %T to %T: %v\"`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I'd actually recommend not putting this in the `SampleConfig`, it's intended more for properties that are inherent of the discovery format. Add a method `getSampleAppName(String apiTypeName)` to `SampleNamer` and override it in the language specific `SampleNamer`s if needed. Then assign it in the transformer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Do we need to export these new functions? I thought the plan going forward was to keep util imports separated to make circular imports less likely and possibly do better chunk splitting. Since only new code references these files, we can scope the import to the specific files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Rails will autorequire `acts_as_editable` once it encounters the constant `ActsAsEditable`. Thus if we move `ActiveRecord::Base.send :include, ActsAsEditable` from _acts_as_editable.rb_ to this file, the require line will not be needed anymore. Instead of requiring the file ourselves, we will let Rails do it for us. This fix will also remove the need to explicitly require `acts_as_editable` in _mock_active_record_base.rb_." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I think we should name this `grpcMethodName` or similar. That is what this refers to, right? The fact that it is upper camel is an implementation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid input, but I don't think it's a valid input.", + "reference": "What if.. appears, but not as the first character, eg \"errors/../../../../../../../../../../../\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.", + "reference": "Thanks, this should make things a bit easier for people who pick up the codebase but aren't a `curation center`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be removed.", + "reference": "why not removing it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "same nit here: maybe word as - \"disables validation of the temporal cluster's server certificate\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this test should be removed.", + "reference": "Nit: other statements use all caps for SQL reserved words. Should this be `SHOW TABLES`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we need this? isLuaIdentifier() is used not only in extract_next_token() but also in extract_prev_toke(). I wonder whether the change for isLuaIdentifier() has an impact on extract_prev_toke() or not. If you are not sure, keep isLuaIdentifier() as is. If you are sure, could you write your conviction to the commit log." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "This line should actually be: `if c.KubernetesProvider == config.ProviderAKS && c.Wireguard.EncryptHostTraffic {` because we only need to tweak the MTU like this on AKS." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this flag.", + "reference": "Do we need to change this flag as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Including the source twice here makes the filesize jump to 432kb. Is there any way to minimize repeating it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This should only be sent if the driver is speaking to a W3C conformant remote, so we need an if-condition check like we have in the Python bindings." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "Only one line of code? What a simple issue!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Conceptual question: why do history and matching need throttler at all? Shouldn't throttling to be handled on FE only?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "Would this be possible: `addCNP` has already processed the CNP to an internalNP, just hasn't added this internalNP to the `internalNetworkPolicyStore`. In this case, `reprocessCNP` will skip processing this CNP and `addCNP` will just add the \"old\" internalNP to `internalNetworkPolicyStore`." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::", + "reference": "Minor: you can access `current_user` in here directly - don't need to pass it in. Unless you prefer passing it explicitly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "What is the purpose of `&` on this line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "See above, the `isValidWebDataStreamID` implementation from before is actually correct. What we need here instead is a new `isValidMeasurementID` function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should be an error... it is important for the admin of the server attempting to create the leafnode connection to see the error asap." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Could you split these conditions up over multiple lines please." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think we can just change this to `Split` instead of `SplitN`. I don't think we need to limit the number of parts in the tag." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "So this is actually a mistake that I introduced without realizing it, and have known would need to be fixed when we get here. The format of the ports directive is \"host:container\". We only want the host port to change, not the internal container ports. The ports variable probably needs to be a map which maps external -> internal ports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "An alternate approach would be to always initialize shardInfo with a dummy (non-nil) value, which could protect against other uses before it's initialized (I couldn't find any though). But I can change it to do it that way instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the `SessionInfoFromProtocol` method. I don't think we should have this in the `SessionInfoFromProtocol` method, but I don't think we should have this in the `SessionInfoFromProtocol` method. I don't think we should have this in the `SessionInfoFromProtocol` method, but I don't think we should have it in the `SessionInfoFromProtocol` method.", + "reference": "Maybe we can just put the entire `DirEntry` in here? I can imagine it might be useful for debugging to get the block ID/refnonce, encrypted size, key gen, data version, etc. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))setsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetset", + "reference": "For the commit message: The paragraphs seem to be out of order? The `Would not work because` refers to the stuff before, but there is a `This may seem pointless, but` in-between." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why did you remove these packages from the prelude, will your new functions not work without this change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "We'd better reserve enough space before using kvKeys to avoid extra malloc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "would it make sense to return empty or error if label doesn't exists?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Don't penalize everyone with 250ms delay b/c some machines have problems." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Probably want a space after the second %s?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This seems like an internal error still?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the future. I don't think we should have this in the future, but I don't think we should have it in the future.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [94/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "out of curiosity, why creating another struct to wrap it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "discipline vs. Discipline? Not sure of which is correct. Also not sure if there is already an existing string const." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "I believe this will break common resources, as they are defined in a common file, but must generate classes in service-specific namespace, so using protoFile to determine package of the generated class would not work, because common_resources namespace does not match service namespace." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "How about `SPARK_DEFAULT_SERIES_NAME`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it should be a constant.", + "reference": "The other properties are in `commit.status-check`, not `commit.status-checks`. Could you remove the extra `s`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Side note: I'd love to see more of these fields exposed on configuration." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "In the case of accounts generated by API clients, what name gets put for the `inviter_name` or `invited_by` record?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to implement getStartBlock here?", + "reference": "I think this class is only relevant for updating the QbftConfigOptions based on the transitions config, so probably not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "what is the number thrown by Geth?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoDb === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoDb === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoDb === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoDb === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoDb === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoDb === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoDb && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost === frontendMongoHost && apiMongoHost ===", + "reference": "This would still crash on malformed database connection string like \"test\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "it is not an interface, maybe we can move to another package?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Same here. Can we use `this.instance.getSettings()` to get `tableMeta`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Not sure whether this validation is useful." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Various things to note here: - Why would `question` ever be falsey (or `None`) here, i.e. why the `if question`? - Why would `question` ever not have that attribute? You set it in `Question.__init__`, so that check does nothing at all (and generally, `hasattr()` should be avoided if possible). - Why do you want to yank `None` (what does that do?) rather than e.g. show an error if there's nothing to yank?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should print(event['Progress'].get('Details')) or print(event['Progress'].get('Details'))", + "reference": "If this is needed for testing, you should use `pytest --log-cli-level=INFO` instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the URL here, but I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We should drop ipify in all places i guess" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Add explanations around these variables - what do they mean, how they should be configured, etc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `site_controller.rb` file.", + "reference": "One thing tho - I would really appreciate any advice on where to move this to, so that it's called on initialisation of the website." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value for displayGatheredResources. I don't think we should have a default value for displayGatheredResources. I think it would be better to have a default value for displayGatheredResources.", + "reference": "To much tabs here (1 tab)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This is not maintaining retention time for logs as we are deleting only 1000 entries and we might end up with huge number of rows spanning over multiple months over a period of time if the cluster generates more rows as we are restricting ourselves to delete only 24k rows/day. Like I pointed out earlier a better would be to probably run this clean up every hour with some batch_size in a loop while there are records to be deleted(i.e older than 12 weeks) and committing each batch." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't like this helper func :-). Yeah, definitely don't like." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Same here. This should remain unchanged. Please, add it back." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "@kvwalker should this method have `ignoreUndefined` supported as an `option`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "we dont use a `sugaredlogger` anywhere else in clutch, just curious why were using it here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Not evident from looking at this diff but the queue is already being cleared four lines below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why is this a 'transaction' and not in the block header?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "This doesn't fit the abstraction level. Should we have a property bag for extra stuff?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Looks like it is pretty easy to miss it when adding new files under `ci`. Hopefully, this doesn't happen too often." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "do we really need the `Ready` call if startup fails midway?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "You can avoid changing the code if there are parameter defaults. right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\"),\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "I wonder why the newline disappeared here? I guess we'll merge and see how SauceLabs fares across the supported browsers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message. I think it should be a message.", + "reference": "I know this is legal, but I prefer we put brackets on our calls" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We keep who wrote the code anonymous." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Two things to make the code more error-proof and simplify it: 1. To be safe, this should be: `! isUndefined( decimal ) &&! isUndefined( decimal.value )` 2. The other clause that you changed below can be combined with that since `decimal` isn't used anywhere else, and so there's no point to re-check whether it's not undefined. In other words, this should become: `! isUndefined( decimal ) &&! isUndefined( decimal.value ) && 1000 > number`, and then you can remove the `decimal = decimal.value` assignment and replace it with line 146 (assignment of `readableNumber`)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Wouldn't composite outbounds compose the transport, such that it would still be represented as a single transport?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need cleanup here.", + "reference": "nit: there is no need for a new line here, usually we tend to put an object creation and its deferred deletion next to each other. It helps not forgetting about the cleanup." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to add a new event to the `RequestPostInitializeListener` class and add a new event to the `RequestPostInitializeListener` class.", + "reference": "Feel free to use the full notation with my email address: `Maxime Steinhausser ` :smile:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.", + "reference": "This was unused across the codebase" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Should we put in which account we were trying to look up?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "either SUPPORTED_TYPECLASS or supported_typeclass. Camelcase only for class names." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `pinned INT NOT NULL` and not `pinned INT NOT NULL`.", + "reference": "This is not going to work. You need to add a migration to the database." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I'm not sure why it's needed.", + "reference": "Should these methods be renamed in this PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if (!MeterProviderBuilderSdk.IsValidInstrumentName(metricStreamName)) {`", + "reference": "we need to include the `metricStreamName` which is invalid, so users know whats causing the issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Load` method.", + "reference": "Please run Platform tests `DiaSessionTests`." + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a... a... a... a... a...", + "reference": "This is debug-build-only: we want a release-build notice. SYSLOG takes the name w/o the MSG and no _STRING. Args are via events.mc specifiers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `parseSrvConnectionString` function.", + "reference": "is it possible to have both forms here? I was hoping we wouldn't be introducing more cases where we had to check the upper and lowercase version of URI options." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Does the name suffix hardcode something? Not clear how changing the name fixes this." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Is undispatched same as queued? getQueuedFlows?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "See above, same for all similar cases below." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))())))(()))((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Why is this done twice?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This sync can ensure that the condition of the child node is consistent with the parent node, but I still don't understand when the child will be overwritten, and this behavior is not what we expected?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This was renamed to avoid any confusion with the more general case of debugging via `plz debug`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `String.valueOf(val).getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8));`", + "reference": "String valStr = (String)val; valStr.substring(0, Math.min(valStr.length(), prefixLength)) Make it clean." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is for.", + "reference": "Sorry, this still makes no sense.. the value of any union or enum is simply a name integer constant, it has nothing to do with the `BASE_TYPE_` enum. This value should be `0`. In particular: `Every union has the NONE field, which always has value 0`." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Looks like getAzkabanURL() is added after concrete Alerter (Emailer)::getAzkabanURL(), so that Override annotation is needed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.", + "reference": "The above 3 lines can be written as: `mask = segms[i].astype(bool)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (from `gofmt`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Thought it's good to have this logged down so that we can check the used value in the logs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I don't think you can call this optional unless it's a pointer - remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "@naofum please use `isEmpty`method instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "i think this is unrelated and needs to be reverted. need to discuss at sync." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Are we eventually moving those type interfaces from plugin project to datatype project? If not, then we'd have a dependency from core onto plugins, which seems a little counter-intuitive to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to wait for the model to be synced? I think we should wait for the model to be synced. I think we should wait for the model to be synced.", + "reference": "Love how we can finally use async/await in the codebase." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Very minor: this line could be moved to a more narrow scope, inside `if (!representative.decode_account (representative_text))` Other than that, LGTM" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((())))))))((((((((()))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "when is this consumed? I'm probably missing it but I can't find it right now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `generateCacheKey` function.", + "reference": "I think we also need to add the rollupGroupExprList() to the cache key. If we rebuild the list above from a ValueIdSet on line 418 above, it is probably going to be in the same order, regardless whether it was ROLLUP(a,b) or ROLLUP(b,a)." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "can use `getParamTypeName` instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why send the parameters? They're accessible directly from `$this->request` so there's no need to inject them in the method" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Tiny nit: I would prefer `not selected_file` or `len(selected_file) == 0`, as if choose_file starts returning, for example, tuples instead of lists, this won't break." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "How will this code behave with hostnames that contain hyphens?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed. I'm not sure why it is needed.", + "reference": "I think this is redundant since \"NullForEmpty\" already calls \"Trim()\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Change this to IDs too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "private static final, and it should be located in raidsoverlay, as it's not needed in the plugin. also the name could be a bit better, DC_SCOUT_RAIDS or similiar." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))()))(((((((((------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "attr_value is 128 bytes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "if it's unpredictable - why uppercase it at all?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to print the error.", + "reference": "Please remove all these debug prints. It doesn't look good." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Consumers of this interface should not be required to provide `sampleHeight`. This should be an expected consensus parameter." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't believe this is the right fix. If startTime comes after closeTime, then it means some other event triggered invocation of this code path like workflow timeout. In this case we should still try to fire the cron on previous value so we should just return start the delta between startTime and closeTime immediately." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Not sure if we need tag here, it is an implementation detail in portworx that isn't exposed in openstorage" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I wonder if it would be cleaner to refactor all of this similar to the SolrMarc driver, so we have a property with Summon field names associated with types, and we iterate through it in a loop... that way we don't have to repeat the loop code four times with different variable names." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to create a new SolrClientCache.", + "reference": "Need the `solrClientCache.close();` further down in the method be removed since a shared cache is now used?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "according to the PR (schema changes?) these 2 field should be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Panic here if `exp.Target.StressChaos.CintainerName` is nil." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This allows for some hacks like returning an iterator that matches more docs than the scorer. I liked the previous approach that returned an iterator better." + }, + { + "prediction": "we should make use of FileIO to create inputFile input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input input", + "reference": "Aren't there already logs for this from the underlying file system implementation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "It would be good to have a test in here that demonstrates the new munge functionality; I can help set that up if you're not sure how." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value for pods. I think it would be better to have a default value for pods.", + "reference": "`retrials` isn't the word you intend. I think you mean `retries` and to that end, can the var name just be `max_retries`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well. I don't think we should add `help` and `help` as well.", + "reference": "Value in product should contain 255 characters or less." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "line is 133 characters (from `lll`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "since we're calling the file.rspec-local, I think we should rename local_options to project_options and use local_options for.rspec-local - WDYT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Will we want to refactor this when we drop rsolr 1.x support?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "should this really be multiple IPs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Hmm, is that partial used in multiple places? Maybe we can just move that file in here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "Should be 2014-2016" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a string, not a string.", + "reference": "Looks like my fault for sure in trying to handle international inputs regardless of locale. I think the correct fix is actually to get rid of TrySplitColumns and use ParseDsvFields instead. It is what gets used in the end, and it already has logic for dealing with quoted fields." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "similarly here, are the these cursors not being closed when the client is closed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Or maybe `func(args...string) Policy` to make it dynamic in case of any future policy that may require more than one args." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should this happen even if the above failed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this file in a separate commit.", + "reference": "Please dont change this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "There is a strange $b that looks wrong." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "Is it still important to have `speakEntry` here? It is checked before this value `containerContainsText` is used in the \"General\" section." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "It is `$JAVA_HOME/bin`, not `$JAVA_HOME`, which should be added." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Should move this to within the `#else` block as it's only used there." + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new test for this.", + "reference": "is this a common rule to wait one extra second after ajax? I'm thinking about moving this extra wait into waitForAjax method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe you can correct the typo \"if\" too :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'd prefer a name less chat-specific, since later on we could have other app types that want the same behavior. Maybe `IdentifyAndAllowTrackBreaks`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I think I was involved in writing that caster, but I never fully understood the `import_mpi4py` thing. Why is importing mpi4py still necessary at that point? I would think if the user is passing a communicator from python code, they must already have imported mpi4py themselves, or does that not propagate through into the wrapping layer?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This seems like a more interesting change. Maybe we should re-name the PR" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a new feature, but I don't think it should be a new feature.", + "reference": "Nit: implement the methods for these interfaces explicitly in this file for consistency. It can be passthrough." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Not directly related to your PR, but I think here we should create a Type enum (MAP, ARRAY, PRIMITIVE) instead of having 3 flags." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;);;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Do you want this to be a stack variable? The work method might return at any time (example: when the parent queue fills up) and then get called again, which would cause this variable to become false again. I'm wondering if this variable should be a member instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "You could reserve a const space to save the extra computation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Did you consider adding rooted paths like `C:\\ProgramData` and paths with flipped separators?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "does this line cause a panic if it is above the if condition?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Maybe `LibraryDetailsPanelType` would be clearer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "minor nit - add \"persist-filesystem\" and \"persist-directory\" into commit message, as its something people may search on (maybe applies to a few other commit messages)" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "I verified offline with @jeremyg-lunarg this should be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should print the error message.", + "reference": "This should be removed? If not, typo in incldued_wf" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Sorry for the delay on this! It looks like Circle CI isn't running tests on some of the PRs, but this doesn't look like it would work I might be missing something, but are the tests all passing locally?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Do you think the godoc should mention that all delimiters will be suffixed with `/`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` if (aURL.startsWith(\"data:\") && SessionStore.get().isCurrentSessionPrivate()) { }", + "reference": "what if I want to load my own, a different, data URI in Private Browsing mode? I do this often on desktop (e.g., `data:text/html,×`). admittedly, I wouldn't expect this to be done by a non-developer, but this will certainly cause a minor bug." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))2))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "I remember the sequence number 0 is kept for the data files for iceberg v1, so in theory the sequence number from delete files should start from 1. So setting it to 0 as the default value sounds correct." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "For all these MYSQL queries unsigned is required. I have tested again and without unsigned these queries are failing." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\") \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Are there tests for this? What happens when you get to limit?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Whole thing could be collapsed to `data['config']['transport'] ||= 'local' if target.name == 'localhost'`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "maybe throw in `&& mServiceConnection.isBound()`, there are cases where the connection might die" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))", + "reference": "Can we add Istanbul with this first EIP please? (or as a separate issue)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't understand this change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "Let's allow translators for this string to be translated: `self.show_warning(_('Invalid Public key'))`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `if` block so that we don't have to worry about the `if` block. I think we should move the `if` block into the `if` block so that we don't have to worry about the `if` block.", + "reference": "This needs to work with `role=form` too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "This should be before the if on line 1028, which should turn into an else if" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Not really introduced by this PR, but I don't recall why these have to be pointers, while `PodSelector` / `NSSelector` do not. Do you know the reason?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Is there a reason why we are ignoring the ackDelay if it would result in a value smaller than the min? Why not `max(sample - ackDelay, minRTT)`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Here's an example of how the files in the `NotYetGenerated` directory drifted out of sync from the generated files. When we made the equality comparers internal, we neglected to fix this one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `admin_index?` method in the GuidancePolicy class.", + "reference": "nice. we should do this elsewhere too. We have a lot of repeated stuff in the policies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Small formatting thing, but can you remove the space before the semicolon?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Not new, but nit: _writeLeng*th*." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Our habit is to go ahead and put a description line (or more) in front of every function, not just non-test or exported functions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "Remove this file from the PR" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think that for cloud variables, the default value in the prompt should be the variable name without the cloud prefix; this is slightly different from the scratch 2.0 behavior, but I think would ultimately lead to less confusion. Proposing code changes below:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a pointer, not a pointer.", + "reference": "I think I would rather fish this interface through than use it as the basis for heuristics." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Probably not worth making this line-ending change, since it is the only change to this file." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Is this the correct place for this assert? Does this routine rely on it being 64, or was this only for testing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "No pb please" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a foreign key to this table.", + "reference": "We need to add indexes here on both `subscriber_id` and `changeset_id` or things will quickly collapse as we build up subscribers ;-) What I would suggest is a unique index on `[:subscriber_id, :changeset_id]` which will also make duplicate entries impossible, and an ordinary index on `[:changeset_id]` for finding the subscribers to a changeset." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "use the context versions of everything, e.g. `PostMessageContext` and thread it through the functions. will save you a bunch of refactoring trouble later on." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.", + "reference": "\"not to be used elsewhere other than\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Thanks for the contribution, @coolderli! I also think the newPosDeleteWriter need the properties setting..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new index to the subscriptions table.", + "reference": "These additions seem unrelated to this change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be configurable.", + "reference": "Could we move this to a class for Hadoop configuration properties, like `org.apache.iceberg.hadoop.ConfigProperties`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -", + "reference": "The related statements should also be deleted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `else` statement.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this line be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Just move this into `const.py`. It already has similar stuff. Also, make it uppercase since it's a const." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Issue is that `currentMode = newMode;` is called at the end of the method. Passcode screen will come up, but since the activity thinks current mode is biometric check we don't check passcode when submitted." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Need change it back?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Didn't we delete this file a while back because it isn't used but people think that it's a security vulnerability that it's checked in?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "nit: Looks like this can be removed now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "Can probably remove the lines above it too (L60-62), since ProvisionDefaultCA() makes sure the map isn't nil." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Do you think it's worth erroring out? It's likely that this is a configuration error that the user might want to know about?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "I think the functional test should not change here, this is probably a test in itself :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Why this to be a public function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think we can remove the timing for export env vars" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "wrong import grouping" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "There is a doubled semicolon ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I'm wondering why this isn't . Seems like one would have to copy the md5.h file into the source tree somewhere for this to compile cleanly. Maybe you meant to use angle brackets instead of quotes?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "shouldn't **call** return a boolean?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "We don't need to cast to client here. (well, from spell gem not AA etc) We should also make sure the charm is a casted spell before calling SendSpellBarEnable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a nullable column.", + "reference": "This is not an `id`. This should either be `invocation_time` or `invocated_at` to be consistent with what we are using elsewhere, and also to better rerflect the column's DateTime type. Also, within the context of this table, there is no idea of what `invocation` is. I know that `scanner` may not be future-proof, but we need to find something more descriptive. Perhaps one possibility is to call this `audit_time`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AssetTransferTx` function.", + "reference": "should the 'Receiver' be the clawback address in case of clawback transaction?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "@ashishranjan738 -- Where are these consts used? in which pkg?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "The only change I would suggest is moving these lines back below the `templates_path` variable to keep the diffs smaller." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Having it above kept the block info in the cached changes, which could end up confusing things quite a bit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If the execute_task returns an `ExecutionResult`, the passing of a block would be unnecessary. Instead, the `ExecutionResult` could be presented to the user in some standardized way (iterating over the result of each node, etc.)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to do that.", + "reference": "Not sure why we make a new channel here. If we don't use this channel, how about creating it inside the `Connect`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not possible to get the last logId from the Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra Ra", + "reference": "There are two question here: 1. If you only modify lastLogId, but the `iter` is not modified, I really don't know whether we can succeed. 2. We will check the if the term has changed in `replicateLogs` (if rollback really happen, the term must have been updated), so I really doubt whether the problem should be fixed in this way. Or you could describe it in more details." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Hello @jDolba, I have reviewed your PR and I found one problem. `$step->getFormType()` can return `FormTypeInterface`. You cannot use interface as key for an array. Can you find some better way to fix this? Thank you." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "i was confused by keyword \"inventory\" here. my understanding is this starts the osconfig-agent which covers inventory lookup and package-management(correct me if i am wrong)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `TIMEOUTS` or `TIMEOUTS`?", + "reference": "These are really meant to be the keys in the capabilities, not the keys of values within the capabilities" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import sinon from sinon.", + "reference": "This breaks tests on IE because this will import an `esm` bundle. For that reason `sinon` is available as a global in our test suite and never imported. The global is aliased to the proper `es5` file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Maybe move all the Loss Recovery constants to a separate file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "this field is added so that we can find disk name by device name from attachments" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Unnecessary new line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "First determine if the namespace already exists, so it's clearer that it's handling namespaces that aren't included in the `c.config.Namespaces`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "What changed in the styles that means we don't need this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This pattern should be applied to the other instance where NewtonsoftEscapeJProperty is used and you can remove the NewtonsoftEscapeJProperty method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this warning should be a warning.", + "reference": "Something to mention in the next changelog/release notes. It will be good to get histogram working consistently with everything else." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What does this contain? Is it PVC namespace or is it openebs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a property.", + "reference": "Design note: Using local concrete data types on a feature abstraction makes it hard to generalize / replace. This is tolerable so long as this remains a kestrel exclusive feature, but we'd need a different design if this were ever moved to HttpAbstractions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the call_state and keep the call_state.", + "reference": "this will break R package, you should update the R files accordingly. BTW, the call state should be in the last argument." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we throw an exception if the context is null instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.", + "reference": "These should both be const, not var right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `build_from_cfg` function.", + "reference": "Rename the directory, match_costers -> match_costs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should test this.", + "reference": "I don't think this should go in the model tests, since it is done in the resource. `PaginatedDeleteTest` seems more appropriate" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "It would be better to just change RWD to throw IllegalStateException if you attempt to execute a command after quit (unless it's a second call to quit())" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to move this into `InstallNewPipeline`", + "reference": "Could we move this to an example test to allow the compiler to help us ensure it stays up-to-date in the future?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Maybe we could update these to use $future and then check on stderr? that way when we deprecate stdout we can not have to delete tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Remove this since it always has to be set afterwards." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "These two tests were causing us to use too many goroutines with `-race` using the default block change size, I think due to prefetching." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `fetch` method.", + "reference": "Is that `try..except` block really needed? I mean, when it could fail?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "If you only want to run a specific group of tests you can always use `.only` like `it.only()` or `describe.only()`. It may not speed up the globbing process as much as this change here :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "nit: I'd probably rename this to `BATCH_SIZE_RANGES`, to use a slightly more descriptive name." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "aren't these the wrong way around?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should create a config config config config config config config config config config config config config config config config config config config", + "reference": "Lets call this getConfigSetService and maybe rename the field now (or later)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `k8s.io/klog/v2/klogr` file.", + "reference": "Could / should we make these constants and give them a type?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a new annotation.", + "reference": "lets stick with lowercase for consistency." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "ordering of imports went wrong" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to all dataFilesTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTable table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table", + "reference": "I think these can all be.name() to get the value we are looking for" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error message.", + "reference": "Is this a good place for these test cases?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should print response_name, attr_name", + "reference": "Did you mean to leave the print statement?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "I would do `new BN(Interpreter.LOCKTIME_THRESHOLD)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "@ftomassetti I turned the tree walking algorithms into iterators so you don't have to visit every node when you only wanted a few, like for a `findFirst`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Need to add type name here to be compatible with proto string representation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "This is to let people know that the tooling is doing something during a build. Please leave." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why is the principal changing here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default Azure public domain. I don't think we should have a default Azure public domain. I don't think we should have a default Azure public domain. I don't think we should have a default Azure public domain.", + "reference": "Naming nit: let's use `AZURE_STORAGE_` prefix for consistency with the other ones." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I'm a bit confused. We have an actual `ProgressBar` Uppy React wrapper component that we are testing. Why do we need a mock for it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "can we use `github.com/pkg/errors`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I changed the name of the arguments here just to help make the code clearer." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i", + "reference": "I think either 'avoiding calls to the function' or 'to avoid calling the function...' would be read better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "@sfricke-samsung -- thanks. saves a few atomic ops which is always good :) The TODO is there to track that this object is storing *both* vectors of shared_ptr and plain pointers to the same data. The shared are to ensure scope, and the plain are for backwards compatibility with existing code that consumed a plain pointer vector (and some code that still does). That should be cleaned up." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not add a test for this. I don't think we should add a test for this, but I don't think we should add a test for this. I think we should add a test for this.", + "reference": "minor: typo (knowMetricsTypes -> knownMetricsTypes)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This adds a case-insensitive flag to the type in the RangeSpec, but I don't think RangeSpecs are written to handle case-insensitive comparisons. Take a look at the methods that deal with comparisons when building RangeSpecs, in file Range.cpp. So, I think you would have to do one of two things: a) disable the RangeSpec transformation for case-insensitive comparison operators (the easy way) or b) change the RangeSpec methods to handle case-insensitive comparisons." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "I would throw an exception if the type is not solved" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "if remove `dt.skipLoad` - then this tests will run. You probably mean opposite?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I feel like we do this in a lot of places should we move that out into its own PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "Already asked you in Matrix, but I'll do it here again so it can be discussed publicly. Why?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove it and remove it and de-indent all the code inside it, no-else-return", + "reference": "I think here should be a comma before remove, in all the cases" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Single quote is used by default in this project." + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a", + "reference": "S1023: redundant `return` statement (from `gosimple`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in Close" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message. I don't think we should add this to the error message.", + "reference": "I'm confused. This exception is thrown when `HeurekaCategory` is not found in database. But this exception extends Http exception. Why? What has database search common with http? If the only reason is that it is the same in the whole project, then fine. But then we have even bigger problem - we don't know how to use exceptions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is it necessary to add the suffix `on_head`, because it belongs to` bbox_head`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Hmm, I wonder if this should just be e.g. `--with-grub-2.02` instead. (Not sure Autoconf supports periods in these switches.) Today's modern GRUB is tomorrow's ancient GRUB. :) Or maybe we should be specific about the feature this is enabling, which might be safer given that each distro carries so many patches. E.g. `--without-grub-efi-16-suffixes`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to delete the instance.", + "reference": "Add a GetSerialPortOutput method to Instance that way you don't need to access the client, also it makes the call cleaner as you don't have the odd i.Client and path.Base(i.Project), path.Base(i.Zone)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [104/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is.", + "reference": "Since CD updates (assignment & power state) are now done in this controller..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Hmm I'd rather not support this option going forward - it seems like a one-off just to work around this particular issue. Would it be fine to just remove the `deepStackTrace` option? The rest of the PR looks great - I love the idea of switching to sets." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "on the one hand I like how little this is doing. On the other hand, `inbound_mail_parser` is doing most of the work here so maybe it's not as helpful as I originally thought" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This line is too long" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This isn't a fatal error, we don't want to crash just because we can't set configs, we have sane defaults set" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I wondered why `buffer` was passed into `LookupPath`. What is happening here? Is `buffer[:0]` equivalent to `[]V4TrieEntry{}`, and hence `buffer` isn't needed any more?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table", + "reference": "I don't really like the name of this file, especially the encoding of an implementation detail (the fact that it's a table) in the name. Can we just use `_message_body.html.erb` instead maybe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be true, but I don't think it should be true.", + "reference": "Feel better not to expose our internal implementation in API/CRD, so no need to mention agent here. Consider: EnableLogging indicates whether or not to generate logs when rules are matched. Default to false." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "use `NebulaKeyUtilsV3::dataVersionValue()` to replace the literal value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "No need for the `\\` here, inside parentheses whitespace is ignored by Python." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This doesn't seem like the right expected result... it should be the same as the `clientCert` var defined above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "need to rename this now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate commit, not a new commit.", + "reference": "NIT: This shouldn't be a TODO. It is just a note isn't it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "I changed this to an error, that seems more appropriate than a warning here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this test.", + "reference": "This change could mute unit test failure, but it is better to update unit tests" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "All other places that access `notificationIdsInUse` are in methods with descriptive names. We should do the same here. Maybe `markNotificationIdAsFree()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "keep as `ErrNotFound`, it is the same convention as in other packages" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Same here, we need to call `callback` in else branch" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "At this point we already check that the record is valid and so it could never be nulll" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Would it not be more sensible just to move setting of the title to later in the method rather than duplicating it here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to uploadSession() here. I don't think we need to uploadSession() here.", + "reference": "why not do it in `reclaimExpiredSessions`? and `pushSessionToCache` can delete" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "out_channels/num_outs/type are unnecessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to use `assert_true(Object.values(dict).length)` instead of `verify_object_fields(Object.keys(dict).length)`", + "reference": "You can create an issue for it and put it on the backlog so we don't forget it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "So now we are checking twice, both here and in `weaveCIDRsFromConfig`. Not great. I suggest changing the `ok` return of `weaveCIDRsFromConfig` to a messsage (or error?) instead, which we can then log." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))))))(((((()))))))))((((())))))(((((()))))))((((((())))))))(((((()))))))(((((((()))))))))", + "reference": "An alternative to setting format to the default in Package.__init__ would be to set it in create_package. I think we can assume all packages are created by create_package, but not necessarily by build_package." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `MiningBlock` struct.", + "reference": "Let's add fee recipient as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "No need for those with `super-init-not-called`, as pylint already only turns things off for this function and it's needed for the entire function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I think there's another spot for this in DefaultCapabilityMatcher" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "this name seems pretty vague -- thoughts on a more descriptive method name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "what changed in this line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `AdminBarClicks` class.", + "reference": "Instead of doing this let's add another function similar to `hasZeroData` for selecting the `reportArgs` since this is all sourced from selected values. Then `hasZeroData` can use this internally, as well as the component itself. Since this function would be internal just for the purpose of avoiding duplication, we don't need to expose it on the component the same way though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "This line was useful for auto-completion, I think it should be re-added with specifying the var name (`$exception`) and simplifying the FQCN." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This looks like you're not collecting everything from the error channel." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This currently violates the Law of Demeter. Using `checkout.plan_name` is the quick resolution." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a param.", + "reference": "is there any scenario when `$temporaryFilename` can be null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not add this to the `visit()` method.", + "reference": "this is for the `boolean isRoot = root == rowType` check, which seems to be on purpose, but maybe you could double check whether using ref. equality here is still wanted? Same for `SparkTypeToType`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the next line.", + "reference": "No need to damage after `roots_drag_icon_update_position`, this is already done in `roots_drag_icon_update_position`" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Have you tested exporting to ONNX with `device=cuda`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid error?", + "reference": "Do we also need to validate `envName` flag then? `appName` and `envName` are used in `initLogsSvc` which are called by `svc logs` from within `Execute()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "@LukeTowers I think I would prefer that we don't force it, on the basis that: a) some people would be opting to configure their web server to protect against this kind of attack and would disable this feature in October CMS to get a small performance increase. b) it might be a bit misleading to say that `app.trustedHosts` set to `false` disables the feature entirely, just to have it be overridden here regardless." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "i like that you are trying to correct the naming, but its making the PR longer :( i guess in future we can do such changes in separate PRs" + }, + { + "prediction": "This is a label of everything", + "reference": "Are we marking what the browser's accessibility tree says or what screen readers with those browsers say?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This method should behave as intended, to block until it reads an EOF from the other side." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I prefer starts with `Failed to xxx`, how about `Failed to perform health check on xxx`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "All these calls make me think we should refactor how traces are started and allow \"source tags\" that we initialize a trace with. I'd like to do this in a follow up." + }, + { + "prediction": "This file is autogenerated via the builtin command.", + "reference": "This file shouldn't be in this PR" + }, + { + "prediction": "Should be LessSpecificReturnStatement?", + "reference": "This now causes `LessSpecificReturnStatement - src/somefile.php:9:32 - The type 'non-empty-list<5|string>' is more general than the declared return type 'non-empty-list' for takesList`, which seems correct to me. The type `non-empty-list<5|string>` contains the type `non-empty-list`. Thoughts?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to log this message?", + "reference": "Are you going to change that back?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "we have a standard format for putting these together elsewhere, it does the filter check first and errors out and then sets based on the value. i think this should be adjusted to do that. there's no logical change, just an approach change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice, but I'm not sure if it's a good choice.", + "reference": "Note this should be `delay` instead of `scale` here. I'll fix this in my branch." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "`on` likely still needs a bind, similar to `this.resetProgress = this.resetProgress.bind(this)` correct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Considering the trade-off between training speed and accuracy, multi-scale training is temporarily kept. More elegant implementation will be adopted in the future." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can you move this up along with the other builtin libraries?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this checkbox is a good choice.", + "reference": "I actually think it makes sense to reposition this checkbox after the notifyForPendingUpdateCheckBox. The current order of check boxes is a bit arbitrary now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Why do we have both `before` and `after`? Naively I would expect this to work as follows: `plz query changed` with no arguments compares the current working directory state to the last commit (i.e. HEAD, i.e. a noop when directly on a git commit). `plz query changed --since [reflike]` compare the current working directory state to the given reflike. So for CI I would expect to run something like `plz query changed --since @{upstream} (or origin/master I guess)`. And on merge I'd either run everything or just `plz query changed --since HEAD^` (given our workflow) - I don't think I'd ever want to do anything else. Either way I think before and after are slightly confusing terms here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Is there a reason why we can't use `~dst`? It feels like that could be good enough.I would like to avoid extending the filter syntax unless there's an urgent need. :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Why local and not UTC?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the error in a separate file.", + "reference": "2012 is a retryable error. Will avoiding rgenerating it here cause a difference in behavior in createServer()?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "move to line 14 below" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "the method name should match teh docs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Won't this happen automatically when we flip the default version in the config?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "This would also change back to /var/www/html/docroot if we go that way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This still needs to use the new option. We'll need tests for it too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this file into the `appModuleHandler.py` file. This file should be moved into the `appModuleHandler.py` file.", + "reference": "We are no longer including file name in the source files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `#set_current_user` method in the `", + "reference": "no need for this. Devise provides us with `current_user` and `user_signed_in?` helpers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Would `Object.equals(capability.getName(), NAME)` would be safer, as you wouldn't have to do null checks?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Hmm, I wonder if we should revert #1862 instead? BTW, what failure do you get w/o this line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "since there are several places where we do 1) get secret key ref and 2) validate URL, maybe it's worth having a common method? it could also trim spaces as done here (but not at the other places currently)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "TestNormalize... I would also split them" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "All changes to this file are going to conflict with #7599. Please revert these as well. They will be addressed during the Python 3 transition." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Just thought, using spinlock (busy wait with compare and swap) that generates 2 random numbers inside rlock. We know that collisions are rare and we don't need that \"large\" write lock really but lock namely for \"rand\". Or least use a separate Lock (Mutex), namely for \"rand\" (wrap it into method). Mutex will use some sort of spinlock as well but it may use some linked list to make it more fair." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can we grab it directly from `__pkginfo__` as that is the source of truth for the version?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We can revert this to reduce the diff of the PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This looks weird. `isCloud` should define if it is a cloud or no. Here it does it partially, and it can be overriden by protoPkg value (which also an argument to this function). Please make sure that isCloud completely defines the cloud thing. (i.e. it an be as straightforward as moving `protoPkg.contains(\"cloud\")` from here to the place where `assembleGoImportPath` is called." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Declaring fileflags to be of type LobTgtFileFlags would eliminate the need for all this casting. And would be safer. (Not a show-stopper though.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to log this?", + "reference": "This change prevents a user understanding how their server is configured. Best to leave at `info` level." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Typically we would add something to the build system environment to differentiate this; also is there an alternative that can be used with older OpenSSL? Other folks who are committers will need to decide if it is worth supporting an older and likely quite vulnerable (to hacks) OpenSSL library." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`readActiveBlockProducersByHeightTests` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Falls back on `Constants.ID` if there's no custom field set." + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't care what the reason why we have to access the file was. We don't care what the reason why we have to access the file was. We don't care what the reason why we have to access the file was. We don't care what the reason why we have to access the file was. We don't care what the reason why we don't care what the reason why we have to access the file was. We don't care what the reason why we don't care what the reason why we don't care what the reason why we have to access the file was.", + "reference": "I believe this is what we want to rearrange: this in.skip() should not be happening here, in the open method, but in the setOffset() method itself. Because we want to be able to change that offset after the initial open. The setOffset() method will need to throw an IOException, if it's called while the InputStream is still null; or if the skip() call itself results in an IOException()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "In case the method is `void`, there won't be any children and `getChild(0)` throws. We'll need to check with `isVoid()` for that case. I'll update this when I merge." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "If the yarpc.Interceptors wrapper will be added to any user interceptor, why not do it transitively. Can save one step for users. Same apply to filter." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the data directory to a temp path. I don't think we should move the data directory to a temp path. I think we should move the data directory to a temp path.", + "reference": "Is there anything we should do in the event we're unable to renaming the directory?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the configmap.", + "reference": "How is this env var populated? Can this be retrieved from cluster metadata?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Should probably skip the success event here, since it could be a noop." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the image blurhashes to the imageBlurhashes array.", + "reference": "I added this here because people cards (which depends on cardBuilder) had this added in blurhash. Not sure when this is used though cc @JustAMan" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep it.", + "reference": "Let's keep this line in the docstring, to let end users know they shouldn't be using this directly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "can do the same for other validateXXX()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `PublisherImpl::get_publisher()`", + "reference": "Why is this necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please move this import upper to other similar imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is for.", + "reference": "Include the key word \"translated\". Otherwise the reader will find this confusing." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "why. is this called per request? if so this also adds a lock internally. can we not add this at the moment until analyzed as this assumption isnt carried to the several other impls. the only other consumer of this is the http api and that isnt hit often enough for specializations." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I believe this means dependent checks can no longer operate on virtual nodes, which is something we've been pushing for lately. We may need to find a different way to solve this issue, as I don't think we want to cause a regression while fixing a bug." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "ditto about use of `abspath`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "this reduces the runtime by 50 times" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this test into the `RemoteDistributorTest` class.", + "reference": "Probably best not to have an empty test...." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "direct `newInstance` call is also deprecated now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the github.com/weaveworks/weave/api.", + "reference": "We have a bit of a convention where imports are split into three blocks: first Go standard library, then imports from outside the repo, then imports from inside the repo." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why was this change needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "can you use this opportunity to remove `.readlines()` useless list creation? (`addresses = [l for l in fd if l.find(\"netmask\") >= 0]`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why does this check differ from `plan_ssh.rb`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this import.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?", + "reference": "It was @lodejard who initially suggested this pattern. I think that it had something to do about prioritizing future writes even if there was a pending write operation ready to handle the newly requested write. I'm not sure I fully understood the explanation for having up to 3 pending write requests, because only having one queued write at a time still makes sense to me. I'll talk to him about it." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug_debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.debug.", + "reference": "We have cli --online_weight_clear in cli.cpp" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "So the request.Headers is a map of []string. Are you sure that the HTTP library doesn't already do this split for us?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "How is this message used? Can we remove the \"crashed executor/container\" part which is an implementation detail?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Instead of building in routing for a browser-specific command, could you refactor the HttpCommandExecutor to allow arbitrary commands to be registered?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `video_available_on` method.", + "reference": "Space after `=`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `getAfterCreateInvocationHandler` method. I don't think we should add this to the `getAfterCreateInvocationHandler` method.", + "reference": "if just need to do something after createInvocation just override and call super first is enough?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "By the way, I fixed `announce` method (missing `super` call to announce JDK version)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "I'm not sure about that... This line can produce ClassCastException if Comparator do not check this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "There wasn't any special reason for this to return a pointer, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Why the need for a `ConcurrentHashMap`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "New code should use strict equality `===`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`expect(resources['Notify[local pid]']['events'][0]['desired_value']).to match(/(\\d+)/)` seems clearer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Removed now-unneeded param." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "(NON-blocking, this can be tracked in follow up issue) @anorth @mishmosh is the toplevel getting too crowded? Should we have a `network` grandparent command, or maybe a `stats` command?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "The `_x` function needs to be imported at the top of the file (in addition to `__`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This is functionally equivalent to the code it replaces." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid value.", + "reference": "can you change the field name here to \"InterfaceAssociationProtocol\"? same for the Config struct in agent/ecscni/types.go. i think it's better to keep the field name consistent between agent and acs payload" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "See above, same for the other cases." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't line 313 be public \\ SettableGauge\\ **settable**Gauge(String name) {? It would also be good to call it a few times and with differnet types (Long, Integer, String) in the test as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I would prefer to just fix the occurences of this new check rather than disable them" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new test for this. I don't think we should add a new test for this.", + "reference": "The tests should be fixed in #4841, so this is no longer needed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `core` class.", + "reference": "I think it should been in `SharedKernel` module." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this annotation to the `ACMEChallengeSolverHTTP01IngressObjectMeta`", + "reference": "Can we add some description for this field?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Should its name be Time or Duration? I can see them both." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Is this used anywhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "I believe that you can use `assert` instead of `require` here and in the following lines" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "In `storagemarket.go` you used `nil` for an unwanted out parameter. Do something consistent (nil seems fine if supported)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "is this a new pattern we use in bee? interesting" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If you think this PR works, i'll clean this up before resubmitting." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the class. I don't think we should add this to the class.", + "reference": "are you sure you can read version by this artifactid?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We can get rid of this import then." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should we do our own vtable?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I'm not sure if it's the right way to do it. I'm not sure if it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This is the actual fix." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to 60 * time.Second.", + "reference": "If sync has really a negative impact, this is just moving the issue from 10sec to 60sec. Wonder if you should not expose the (auto)sync params so users can decide." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be done.", + "reference": "should be called => will be called" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "not sure whether we should do this. It may cause problem that delegates upgrade their nodes at different time, that they will have different \"last block time\", some use \"commit time\", some use \"block time\". Potential solution: Only use block time after berling, and then delete it in the next version after berling. Open to discussion." + }, + { + "prediction": "???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????)????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????", + "reference": "So one question I have is why is the error coming back from `buildReplicaPositions` not an `Assign.AssignmentException`? Is it because it is wrapped in a `SolrException` from the remote node?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "`dt` won't work for some reason?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this because \"KOALAS_USAGE_LOGGER\" can be `None`??" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "I like it but maybe the better name will be EthGasPriceConstants or EthGasPriceEstimatorConstants? but Constants not Config" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I would inline the constructor as well" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I'm not confident about this..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "There is also `v1alpha1.CertificateRequestKind` I think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we rename it to make it less confusing? Instead of \"sender-gcpbroker\", maybe name it to \"retryable-sender\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a valid error.", + "reference": "So looking at the definition of the `literal()` function in this class, it seems it's possible for it to return null. I guess it's not a concern as we would get NPE on the above call at line 136 when trying to call `.to` if `literal()` returned `null` before even getting to this part that calls `literal().value()`, but something I thought I'd bring up. Perhaps something we might follow up on in another issue or possibly I just missed the workflow that makes `literal()`'s result non-null by the time this `bindLiteralOperration` is called." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why did you break the line? It looks like it is under 80 characters without the break and it is inside parens so no need for backslash anyway" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `try` block.", + "reference": "@guolinke Don't you mind to rename this variable to `DATATABLE_INSTALLED`, for the consistency with other variables (for example, there are `PANDAS_INSTALLED` but not `PD_INSTALLED`). Also, `DT` is a little bit confusing: sometimes `dt` is used for `datetime`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We're fine with double quotes here. Just for future reference." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "can we keep this around? We should make sure we can distinguish between properly wrapped errors and \"unwrapped\" errors" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the stage_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state", + "reference": "`RecordPipelineShaderStage()` might change `topology_at_rasterizer `, according to shader code, so we should check `pInputAssemblyState `first." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the `build-webpack-plugin.js` file.", + "reference": "Should we just inline the assets here? I can't think of an advantage to having them in a separate file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "detectStaleEndpoints to be more specific?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Please create a new issue for addressing this (if there isn't one already), so it doesn't get lost." + }, + { + "prediction": "make interface{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}", + "reference": "Nothing was ever coming out of this channel because its already being consumed. Create a new channel here and feed it in HandleNewHead method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendend))))))))))))))));));));endendendendendendendend).).).).).).).).).).).).endendendendendendend).).).).).endendendendendend).).).).).endendendendendendendend).).).).endendendendendendendendendend).).).endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));));));));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend", + "reference": "This is deliberately at this level." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "payload entered on command line is in hex-encoded format should use same processing as in ioctl/cmd/action/actiontransfer.go" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should add a reference to the pricing group. I don't think that's a good idea, but I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "should this be kept in the `else` branch?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why not put this below \"strings\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Make it `internal` if it's just for testing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think pylint is a good choice.", + "reference": "What is triggering this message in this file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Are you sure this should be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "What's that good for? The field is initialized in the constructor." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This shouldn't be necessary (same below). Do you have a traceback for me?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "No newline needed here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why a separate block?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(setsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetset", + "reference": "Probably better to ask @AssadHashmi or another AArch64 expert for a review rather than me -- @AssadHashmi if you could confirm that these status registers are 64-bit despite having only a few fields?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`purpose` and `coin_type` and `account` would mimic the BIP-0044 wording, but it's up to you." + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be changed.", + "reference": "Is this the critical change? It does seem wrong to use Select() instead of Checked = true. Not sure why that would pass sometimes and not others, though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Seems a little low, but is this an installer default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `logger = logging.getLogger()`", + "reference": "Maybe we could provide our own `configure` function that includes `logger._logger = None` because I don't see a use case in kinto for using `reset_logger` besides configuring the logger." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This will cause the same breakage that was caused when we added Proof to Block. Be sure to let people (infra?) know ahead of time" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Fixed the test; @strib want to validate that this is okay? Seems to be consistent new GC behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `subdomain` instead of `subdomain`", + "reference": "Afaict, nothing cares" + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't need the node cache in minimal mode, since there's no node cache in minimal mode. We don't need the node cache in minimal mode, since there's no node cache in minimal mode.", + "reference": "I must be missing something, but why does not having a node cache imply not neededing to re-embed the block changes, in particular? Isn't it just the fact that we don't do any writes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Are these changes from `class` to `struct` breaking if called from an older version of `Datadog.Trace.ClrProfiler.Managed`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "These are just aliases now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Does this mean we can remove `raw` from `_head_contents` partial?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should close the splash window if the splash window is destroyed.", + "reference": "`isDestroyed` is a function, not a property. This condition will always return false." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Why are we adding these versions?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "fyi, you can do this by doing `.info(\"string %s %s\", formatparam, formatparam2)` instead of doing a string format with `\"str\" % (params)` the idea is that it'll only do the string interpolation if logging is enabled for this level, which theoretically is an optimisation, but in this case probably isn't important" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to reload the page if it's already loaded.", + "reference": "Would this work, as a one liner? `setTimeout(window.location.reload, 5000);`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you move `crypto/tls` into the block at the top with all the other stdlib imports?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `anomalyScore`. I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "What is the motivation for this change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "OK, so the concrete implementation will loop? But then it's important that this method waits for a while before it returns no messages. To be specific, a GCP implementation that set `ReturnImmediately` to true or false would both satisfy this requirement, but the first would cause busy-waiting." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "The data structure of `MatchClauseContext` may need to be redesigned." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "You say on the issue that something has to be receiving while the messages are being published. But here it's possible that the publish goroutine starts, and maybe even completes, before Receive is ever called." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "how do we know that the step in question is an approval type step?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "JMX offers normal APIs for this. I don't think you want the glassfish one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Is this still Java 8 compatible? @danieldietrich do we need a separate, modularized Java 9 release also?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Should update the user input address and filter modes and pass those in fillSamplerDescriptor?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This object should be in `lib/music/show.rb` and you should also wrap this object in the `Faker::Music::Show`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think logic will have to move to bolt since the vague discussions around bolt run plan --noop is that it would just skip any tasks that don't support_noop rather than error. This is fine until we actually elaborate that though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the README.md.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.", + "reference": "why should unknown raise a 403?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "The true clause of your condition, can't this just be c._nextState since `assign({}, c._nextState)` is equal to returning c._nextState, or am I misunderstanding something here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),falsefalsefalsefalsefalse),falsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalse),falsefalse),falsefalse),falsefalsefalse),falsefalsefalse),falsefalsefalse),falsefalse),falsefalsefalse),truetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetrue),truetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetrue),truetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetrue),truetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetrue),truetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetruetrue", + "reference": "nit: align the leftmost quotes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Probably \"server port\" -> \"TCP port\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "Why not just rename it to Lucene80?", + "reference": "can you use FilterCodec instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean value.", + "reference": "I know there's only two values but I find it a bit confusing that it's true/false. Could you change it to a string enum with values \"portrait\" and \"landscape\"? Then when calling printToPdf you can just do `landscape: Setting.value('export.pdfPageOrientation') === 'landscape'`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think this migration should fail for MDBX if it uses old table names" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should this be negated? `!@options[:hosts_file].nil?` Otherwise it'll enter the `if` statement and `nil` will be passed to `HostsFileParser.parse_hosts_file`, which I'm assuming is bad." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `LoadConfiguration(setupBuilder.LogFactory, true, configBuilder)`", + "reference": "I'm doubting if adding a bool here is a good idea. Maybe it should be an option object? Otherwise it's hard to extend. But an option object is a bit strange in a fluent API? What do you think @snakefoot?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new enum to the `UnionPostingsEnum` class. I don't think we should add a new enum to the `UnionPostingsEnum` class.", + "reference": "This is used in o.a.l.sandbox.search.PhraseWildcardQuery." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "view should be loaded on start for both statedb and factory" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Why rename? Just curious..." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Is this needed? I think it calls the super function that already does that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This might slow down the inference time, are we sure we need to do that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "This would read better if you add \"Skip code/lines\" or (exclude/hide code if you follow my earlier suggestion\")" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "Looks like glassfish went a bit nuts doing a refactor" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: allocate the list using the number of processors." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not change the code.", + "reference": "Was this change triggered by baseline?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This code was doing nothing as far as I can tell and was making the SQL find nothing with the new version of Rails. Remove it unless someone can explain why it is there." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean.", + "reference": "Setting browser based login as the default for `RestAPIExplorer`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `DataParallelTreeLearner` class. I don't think we should move this into the `DataParallelTreeLearner` class.", + "reference": "maybe we can do this in Init function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "How about if request ID not set, service should generate a random uuid?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "minor: this is an opportunity for you to split these long lines into multiple lines :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "It would be nice to have exception dumped somewhere (debug logs, info logs)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Topic` interface. I don't think we should add this to the `Topic` interface.", + "reference": "So I don't think this is right, as discussed on #657." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `SELECT group_id, member_role, member_type, member_email FROM group_members_{1} WHERE group_id = '{0}';`", + "reference": "should the group_id = \"{0}\" be group_id = %s You'd still keep the {} for the group_members_{} for the tablename but make the filter clause parameterized." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `str(file_dict.get('path', path_exc))`", + "reference": "Path can contain variable pattern in the middle. Also, `$` is not enough to tell if this is JMeter variable. We have correct variable detecting somewhere in our code." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "@bennothommo can you revert this section? It shouldn't be required." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if self.created_at.month >= 10`", + "reference": "Minor: maybe move the above to a `#fiscal_year` method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "You should use the current directory instead - it's a temporary directory that will get removed when the test is done." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I think we don't need synchronization here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I don't think this should be changed since on the reactive side we don't support anonymous users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Maybe this `if` should be on line 118?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Cool. (I thought I had fixed this already in #812.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I intend to do this as soon as I have tests passing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Please remove the `test_*` from the filename - otherwise pytest will try to collect tests from it." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Did you file a bug to follow up on this?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Looks like these 4 lines didn't actually change. Can you revert the whitespace changes here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "This can't be merged with any usage of `require 'pathname'` in lib, it's not always available and we don't want false positives for people (where they don't realise they needed to requite it). Its also unnecessary, no other formatter uses it to look up failure locations. See the exception presenter etc for how we format lines." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `createLinkingDataset` method.", + "reference": "It would be nice to fix the indentation above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "`short_names` is still optional, so `=` that indicates it has to stay there." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "missing calling of this method" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `archerCfn` file.", + "reference": "We could get rid of this dependency being forced on clients by changing the `StackConfiguration` interface abstraction to deal with strings instead of `cloudformation.Parameters` and `cloudformation.Tags`, and internally to the `cloudformation` package translate the input strings into the `service/cloudformation` package specific values hiding that from consumers. I don't think that should be taken on as part of this PR, but I think we should consider doing it at some point." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to `stress-chaos-mesh`", + "reference": "`StressChaos` does not contains a field.spec.action" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Non-int literal strings are no longer coercible to int, I think this is an improvement. Without this change it now reports `InvalidArgument`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "I this used anyplace?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Why was this change required?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `AuthorizationException` class.", + "reference": "I like that we have this attribute here. However, I think the way we use it right now might be confusing in the future. For example, when only camunda admin is checked, this exception will be instantiated with a message and `missingAdminRole` is `false`. I think that is counter-intuitive. I would expect this exception to have `missingAdminRole` set to `true`. With this explicit information, the exception message could now be generated inside this exception class with the text block that is currently used in the authorization manager. We could maybe generally reuse that text block then also for the case where a user is no admin and also has none of the required permissions. I haven't tried it myself but I think it would be great if we could streamline those things a bit more if we're working on it now. Let me know what you think." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Not sure why we're creating a new `ByteBuffer` here, ideally this refers to the existing one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Same here re: `STORE_NAME` to `MODULES_SEARCH_CONSOLE`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.", + "reference": "I could've sworn I got a `403` myself when I got that response locally. Is `200` what the API would send back for a `permission: false` tag?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This attribute was intentionally private. - lets force usage of factory `NewIdentityManager()` - lets ramake to `NewIdentityManager(keydir string)` -> `NewIdentityManager(keystore keystoreManager)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Is this too frequent?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `upload.js`", + "reference": "will this not make it possible to use a zip file, e.g. on other importers who do not have to support it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import `Http2Layer` from `Http2Layer`.", + "reference": "Needs to be mentioned in `__all__` below." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "What if the app's signal handler, executed at pre-syscall for epoll_pwait, executes its own epoll_pwait? For that matter: what happens natively if that happens? I would not expect the kernel to keep a stack -- does that clobber the kernel's stored pre-syscall mask?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Nit: missing a space. I think we should phrase the new content a little differently. \"It is important\" isn't very clear. I think it should be \"offsets will be returned in sorted order.\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can you remove this blank line and put the added import in sorted order (likely your editor will do this)" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Even if `pthread_create()` for `ocsp_updater_thread()` fails, `h2o` can continue to serve. But I'm a little worried whether `h2o` should continue to serve in this case. How about you?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I like introduction of these constants for account/container creation, but the `ACCOUNT_CHOOSE` one isn't needed I think. This should instead be an \"empty\" value (either `''` or `0`), to indicate more clearly that this field is not filled. It should be the same for choosing a container." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a function, not a function.", + "reference": "I noticed that passing in `[]` for the locales argument instead of 'undefined' seems to have the same effect. I think that's preferred over passing in `undefined` as a value, and unfortunately passing in `null` seems to throw an error." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "1. `0` is redundant. 2. We should save result of `strings.LastIndex(DbCfg.Host, \":\")` to a variable and reuse." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value for `NoSublistCache` and `NoSublistCacheCache` in the config file.", + "reference": "Do you envision \"new\" servers not supporting header, or is it more a way to test mix of old and new? If so, we could make it a \"private\" (non exported) option." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to wrap the error here. I don't think we need to wrap the error here.", + "reference": "For future reference. Try not to do refactoring in the same PR which solves some bug or implements some feature. Not to clutter reading. Do it in separate PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this flag.", + "reference": "I'm not sure about changing the flag name. unit is more accurate, but for I think for most people asset is also a fine name to use." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Which windows gets activated? A random other window?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Just to make sure, this is totally lossless? If I put a v2 there, then it gets upgraded to v3, but my function expects v2, then this is fine and nothing is lost?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value. I don't think we should have a default value, but I don't think we should have a default value.", + "reference": "In the past, we have 3 Flink streaming jobs (1 for each AWS region) writing to the same table. We need to write to 3 different watermark table properties (1 for each region). Watermark consumer then use the min value to determine the overall table watermark. A provider pattern similar to `WRITE_LOCATION_PROVIDER_IMPL` can work. A default impl could be a single property name. not sure if there is a simpler way to achieve this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you change this to `ResolvedUsersMap` and build a new map with both readers/writers? That way, we get the nice side effect of not exposing the internal map of the handle, and simplifying the callers a bit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I typically try to avoid nested ternary expressions. Can we rewrite this as if statements? Worst case, can we break it out into its own function?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Do we still support handshakes without SNI present?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe it's because I work too much on a centralized logging system but it could be great to add a \"category\" like \"attribute\", \"substitution\", \"include directive\", \"macro\", \"extension\"..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the pointer declaration from the name.", + "reference": "it have no sense in python -> it makes no sense in python" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "maybe just do a separate implementation of the pool for openvpn case? It's a bit confusing having two methods here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should close the topology.close(true);", + "reference": "how is it possible to have a `topology` that is falsey when we had to call `topology.connect` in order to get here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we need this expectation? If we don't call this method on `PlanFinder` there's no way for the `10` to be returned. Seems somewhat redundant. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "We need to do the same for edgecore" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "This fix has nothing to do with the product change. Just a fix I am making for the test issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Don't know what should be the default. Lets keep BatchingProcessor for now. And revisit the area after beta." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Ah that's how it's happening, it's probably using the `require_relative` in the optimised one and that counts as a different require to the bare one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "What happens if there is no NIB/XIB with that name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "this is not necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "typo: `asmsecrets \"github...`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "I think that the JSON encoding should be handled by the control itself, not the sanitization function. This should only confirm that the input is correct, not reformat it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return it here.", + "reference": "Should we put a TODO here to route the http.Transport through here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Sorry, could you explain more about the issue? Doesn't ComputerName already default to local computer? > -ComputerName Specifies one or more Hyper-V hosts on which the virtual switch is to be configured. NetBIOS names, IP addresses, and fully qualified domain names are allowable. The default is the local computer. Use localhost or a dot (.) to specify the local computer explicitly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "`allowError` is a big vague. Does this mean the test case is asserting that an error should occur? If it means \"maybe an error can occur, and that's okay\" -- what's an example of this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "return statements should not be cuddled if block has more than two lines (from `wsl`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not used?", + "reference": "Why does VirtualMachineMetrics have to implement Metric?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "line is 121 characters" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "How's that linked esbench looking with slice?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The split and join was probably done to ensure that this still works on Windows because os.path.dirname works differently depending on the os you're running under :(. It would probably be a little better to do `dirname, _, fn = path.rpartition('/')` if you want something cleaner than the split/join." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This is not the right approach. The `Distributor` maintains a model of the current state of the Grid. That model already contains the information about every active session. We don't need to modify `SessionMap` to expose it further." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Can you make this a member var as all the other deadlines? Then you can drop the param to resetTimer() and simplify some of the code below iiuc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "I don't understand the reason for the changes from unique_ptr to ROMOL_SPTR that you made in this file. The pointers aren't being shared or used elsewhere so I don't think there's any reason to make them shared. Did I miss something?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "why change the variable name at all?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Since I'm still trying to keep these straight in my head, can you elaborate on what problem this solves?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Prefer TextUtils.isEmpty() which handles getReportSpamRecipient() being null" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Couldn't you just write this as an if/else or a guard clause like on line 87? Just seems a bit weird doing this conditional assignment for essentially an if/else." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Do we actually use Include anywhere yet or is this just for completion?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `referer-header`", + "reference": "It still bugs me this was misspelled in the standard and now the wrong spelling is the commonly used one :wink:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "seems we missed de-uglifying this one" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "i guess these types & cron / retry specific belong to a dedicated util / struct" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Also update line 2205 below" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.", + "reference": "`direction` is referenced nowhere. Do I miss something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The two places this was used have been removed so we can fully remove this dependency." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "This is a duplicate generation of the same file as below." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))((()))((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "We may deprecate `gpus` if `gpu_ids` is specified." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "Right now this is experimental and deeply flaky. We left this at `info` to make debugging user reports a lot easier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "unnecessary spaces here are doubling the size of this otherwise extremely useful addition" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `TracerHome` folder.", + "reference": "I think we should use `FileExistsPolicy.Overwrite` instead. Files _should_ always be newer, but in the unlikely case they wouldn't be, I'm afraid some files would be overwritten and other not, leading to inconsistencies that will be hard to figure out." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test. I'm not sure if it's a good test, but I'm not sure if it's a good test.", + "reference": "this should probably be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Nit: I would actually prefer that pretty JSON is the default, with a flag for compressed JSON. Can we acheive that easily?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Will need to think about this one. `additionalIngressRules` feels a bit opaque in terms of eventual outcome." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we avoid making this public with the other updates?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Why did you change this equal instead of less or equal?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "missing final for the blockHash field" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `factory_bot_rails` file.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`x_float` instead of `float_x`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Is this for `No Babel config...` from ESLint? If so, it will be fixed in my ES6 PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Not important, but the code used to keep checking other cases even after one of them failed, and now it's not. Fine either way for me, just noticing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the github.com/aws/aws/amazon-ecs-agent/agent/utils/ttime.", + "reference": "I think I saw this line in last PR, you can update your base branch and rebase to avoid this. And it would be awesome if you can rebase instead of merge each time you push PR to the `moby` branch, that will make the commits history clearer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate PR.", + "reference": "If this can change the PC of this thread, it requires handling: we can't blindly execute the syscall and lose control of the thread when the flags include CONTEXT_CONTROL. (Note that most docs imply that setting your own context this way is not supported or has undefined or unpredictable results: any idea how often that's the case, or does it generally work?) We need to handle in a similar fashion to NtContinue or setting another thread's context to ensure we retain control." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `getTotalProductCount` method.", + "reference": "@huzaifaiftikhar Changed the endpoint as suggested by Stephane in the latest commit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "There's no core.Number yet. ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a good option.", + "reference": "...,...will be posted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you update this function to be `ShowHeader`? There is only one use of it at the moment in `tools/fast/series/get_head_block_height.go`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "@akarve, this disables `tqdm` by default, is it intended? Also name `QUILT_USE_TQDM` might be too specific, IMHO `QUILT_INTERACTIVE` or `QUILT_PROGRESS_BARS` or something might be better." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "unrelated but just changing for consistency with code below it" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This will call `componentWillUpdate()` for mounts because the else clause is removed. It should only be called for updates." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `collection` table.", + "reference": "We should add write inheritance too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "Please rename this to `LAMBDA_JAVA_OPTS`, and add a short description to the README." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Should be in the same import group." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Operator precedence is very confusing here. Care to add parentheses? ` ((version or 0x0303) >= 0x0200)` Same below." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")##endendendendendendend))))#endendendend))))))endendend))))))end))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "javaparser-core has no dependencies and it should stay that way. So no log4j. And even then there would have been a preference for slf4j." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to re-identify the specific DTA flavor. I don't think we need to re-identify the specific DTA flavor, but I don't think we need to re-identify the specific DTA flavor.", + "reference": "Why not just retest all? it's not expensive (I think)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.", + "reference": "ecr and ecr0 aren't deterministically named here. This change will just cause confusion in the git history. Could you either: a) fix this and make it deterministic b) regenerate the mock until it doesn't flip definitions for ecr and ecr0" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This looks like bash... does this work in ruby? Or is the idea to inject the entire script into the subsequent commands?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I don't understand why this change is in this PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I think it would be better to add a deprecation_horizon to the `Blacklight::FacetsHelperBehaviorBehavior` class.", + "reference": "It's a little hard to tell from the diff, but as a result of this PR, the only non-deprecated helpers are: - `has_facet_values?` (probably not long for this world) - `render_facet_partials` (perhaps part of a future component) - `render_facet_limit` (possibly obsolete once components get traction) - `facet_field_in_params` (a little tricky to deprecate at the moment) - `facet_field_presenter`" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))(endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end............................................................", + "reference": "The right-hand part shouldn't use `__proto__`. Should be just `PersonObject.__proto__ = Realm.Object`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a panic.", + "reference": "the == case might be legit, or not? If there is no task written since last read, but we trigger a new read, would the min == max? Or should the upper layer handle that case?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the old_size in the function.", + "reference": "Good catch! But is it guaranteed that `old_size < new_size` here? If not, wouldn't we want to take `min(old_size, new_size)` as the copy length?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This is the only one that worries me a bit. It would be good if Brendan signed off on it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into `ApiMethodView` (`ApiMethodView` )", + "reference": "`LongRunningOperationDetailView` already has `isEmptyOperation`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this header is needed.", + "reference": "This will always add the authorization header to the request object. Is this the right scope for these two lines? If username/password are not defined, it will encode 'Basic :'" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need the `updated_at_desc` here.", + "reference": "Don't think a scope adds much value for us here. Also, for future reference, you don't need to use the `self.all` it is implied. Could just be: `scope :updated_at_desc, -> { order(updated_at: :desc) }` No need to change this one now though, it works." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I believe `Base.` is unnecessary in this case, as the class already extends `Base`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Couldn't this result in images being scaled too small when the width is less than the height assuming the width is still what is being passed here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `api.offline_mode` to `api.offline_mode` in `api.offline_mode`", + "reference": "Here also, let's not cache value on top of file, but use `plugins.getConfig(\"api\").offline_mode` directly where it is needed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `LibraryCardsController` so that we don't have to change the code.", + "reference": "You can combine the two checks into a single `!empty()` check." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "Should we add a warning for anything over say 8M? Just suggesting that is not recommended?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Looks like there are no callers left of this function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should there still be a ` bool` trailing `showOutput`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Did we can change to v1" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you please double check that this won't break anything?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "optionals, shouldn't need to be stated explicitly" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "That seems quite low - why not just 0x5130ffff?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why is this needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`Bolt::Config.user_path` returns `nil` if there's no homedir, so this will still error in that case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: use %s for strings and %v for objects." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Same as before, the properties already exists in parent" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This fix is not quite correct. The `%s` should be replaced with `version` and the `%d` on line 39 should be replaced with `datetime.datetime.now().year`." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Maybe we should only set active = false if `strcmp(type, \"pause\") == 0`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Same here. and all others." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Intentionally committed? I'm not against it, we already have a way to get goroutines without killing the process: `/keybase/.kbfs_profiles/goroutine`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "I think this blank line may be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I think this should be a keyword-only argument, i.e. do `def add(self, url, title, *, toggle=False):` and adjust the caller to do `toggle=toggle`." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "@aimanrosli23 Judging from the commit description, I do not know why this file got changed so much. Could you help to double confirm if you do not revert the changes brought by commits: SHA-1: 643623147a1feaddd734ddd84604e1d8e9dcebee * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Send SEND_STATUS at lower frequency SHA-1: 49accdedf956f175041040e677163b7cbb746283 * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Hook SwitchClockFreq after SD clock start" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "How about YAML.load_file()" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((())))))(((((())))))(((((((((())))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Maybe make this `volatile` or atomic as this can be set/read from different threads? Also, separately you may want to check if some of the methods here need to be `synchronized`." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Check the return value of the drmgr ones." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js fileupload.js", + "reference": "This should be `'cache'`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "The name \"old\" might cause confusion here. After installation, the \"old\" repo is at an archived path, and the new migrated repo is at the old path. Maybe something like \"target\" or \"canonical\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I think this is somewhat definitive proof that this error exists in `core` rather than `native`. We are correctly resolving the `readPreference` in the previous line, but you are able to identify that eventually the command generated in `core` is not decorated with the passed `readPreference`. Did you try to solve this there already?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "During genesis sync it can unwind 5M blocks?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure why we need this.", + "reference": "was it caused by the removal of removeTaskQueueManager() from this test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do that.", + "reference": "Wouldn't it just be easier to force search_session to return `with_indifferent_access`? Since you've done the hard work already, I don't think there's a problem doing it this way, but.." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "So, such tasks that could possibly not meet the deadline will never have a chance to run? I think this is not nice behavior, especially for those projects who has sometimes some very small tasks after the big one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "You should add the check above this line instead. If string is empty, don't even call the function." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "If clientCert attribute doesn't exist for some reason I set it to false." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we need `app_host_flags` variable? We can directly concat with `flags`. `sh.cmd curl_cmd(unless Travis::Build.config&.ssl&.verify? flags +'-k' : flags, location, static_file_location), cmd_opts` right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Walk should actually be completed (`onWalkCompleted`) after the event is stopped. This also makes it possible for monster to walk by smaller paths." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "typo in `weather` (should be `whether`)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Thoughts on having the URI as the param, instead of a boolean? The default value would be the normal prod image, and then your test would override with the staging image." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm surprised this is needed, but we should probably assert num_scan == 1 at least, otherwise I expect the file is pretty broken." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Could we set a default value for `partitions` and `{0, network::NetworkUtils::getAvailablePort()}`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Needs xml docs. The API names alone don't provide enough explanation about what these mean and how to set them. Also, we should provide some validation of inputs, such as MaxTime must be > MinTime, MinimumRate must be >= 0, etc. Consider making the properties readonly and adding a constructor that does these validations." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Would it make sense to create an empty file here, perhaps in a tmp dir, instead of checking empty files into Git?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a constant)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This change is due to `clang_format` and is not related to this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Why did you not add the signals to the call of block_all_signals_except() and instead baked them into the function? Ok, if you had a good reason for it, otherwise I would add it to the except list of the function call, since that's what it was meant for." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FeedFileDownloadStatusRequester` class.", + "reference": "Could this be done by mocking objects instead? I feel like this is changing too much of the actual logic just for the tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `Integer` instead of a `Integer`", + "reference": "why not just use `ManifestContent` instead of `Integer`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "can we do that in TxValidator?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "We definitely want some detailed and thoughtful docs being added to this type." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We would like this code to run, even when `config.XDPEnabled` is false, so that Felix can clean up its own XDP state after a restart." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "If the status is `ERR_SPACE_NOT_FOUND` why return `SUCCEEDED`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "It is is more appropriate to use `downsample_first`. If `downsample_first=True`, the downsample block is the first block and it is used for ResNet. If `downsample_first=False`, the downsample block is the last block, which is used by Hourglass network." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Would you mind removing the default parameter above? (I doubt I'll ever use defaults again since you still have to protect against callers explicitly passing `null` or `undefined`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I don't know if there are strict conventions about this, but I think the name of the warning should be the diagnosis, not the suggested course of action. In this case, that would mean changing the name of the warning to `interactive-exit` or something like that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to validate the common name is correct.", + "reference": "If `crt.Spec.CommonName` is not set, and `cert.Subject.CommonName` *is* set, we are not correctly handling it here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This isn't a test, so it shouldn't be named `test_init`. You could name it `cmdhistory_init` or so." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "why is this pulling from `self.spark_version` config section rather than the `spark` config section (`py-packages` appears to pull from a config section called `spark`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: Think it can be one line.." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "please inline imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "We can't join cgroups if we're in a rootless container.", + "reference": "This check is still correct in some cases, but I guess erroring out is acceptable if someone explicitly asked for an impossible cgroup configuration (now that we could in principle nest things). I would like to see a test for this though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new column to the table.", + "reference": "Should we update integral to operate on a single column as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Doesn't belong to this PR" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Just for my own understanding, does aws ecs API take this token as a new input attribute? Which version of the aws sdk? I did not find it in the official aws sdk doc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Could we shorten this constant to maybe `FEATURE_USER_AUTH`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Any particular reason for 8? I feel like we could probably handle more..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should update retry_count if it's not set.", + "reference": "Try to use factory association declaration for default values, so it could minimal the line length. You may write in fetch_job factory like association :repository, factory: :repository." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `status-header-container` table.", + "reference": "Should the \"cancelled\" class be added regardless of the proposal's state?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "nit: random whitespace change, let's try to keep these out of commits unless there are other useful changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the `populate` function.", + "reference": "Seems kinda dangerous - what if models length is different from paths length?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "set real one plz (get it from DB)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should this be initialized to zeroes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "The query is already built at this point, so I don't think this particular change actually helps wrt SOLR-10732? (and the `base.size()==0` case is already trivially optimized in `SolrIndexSearcher.numDocs(Query, DocSet)`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "re-add the type in the annotation here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Could we simpify it as `cmd.Stderr = &bytes.Buffer{}`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "there's enough \"nots\" in here that while it's correct by my review, I'd like to see a small unit test (just passing in an expired and non-expired cert)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a parameter.", + "reference": "The config option should probably have a more specific name. Also it's not for all gridded data but specifically for Images (and its subclasses)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Be careful. This is not a preference but an option in a dialog." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "this will modify the incoming object, which may not be desirable in some cases. i think we should stick with the local var, override it with deployment.ClusterName if deployment.ClusterName not empty" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.", + "reference": "Is this not required?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "You're using scare quotes on these terms instead of defining them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.", + "reference": "These should both be const, not var right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Can you catch a more specific exception here? Thanks :-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This is a bug during handling the recover logic in `common chaos` controller, I fixed in this request when I found it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "During testing, we adopt the score threshold specified in the config file. Here the threshold is only used for visualization, and the variable name `score_thr` can be misleading. Renaming it to `show_score_thr` would be better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove the nav menu from the navigation menu.", + "reference": "can you make this `nav-primary` please? i'd like to roll with this since the `
    ` class is `nav`, and primary is the name of the navigation menu" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "@georgehrke Just out of curiosity. Couldn't you combine at least the combine the regex for '-' and '' with groups?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I think this is objectively better than looking up the object by name. As a follow-up, I'm going to see whether we do this name-based lookup somewhere else and switch to your method." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(endendendendendendendendend))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend", + "reference": "Why are you dividing by scale in the LTR case but not the RTL case?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `RemoteConnection` class.", + "reference": "Update after command rename" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this filter if we don't have it.", + "reference": "I added this change to fix a bug with the legacy settings wrapper which was preventing it from working properly with the other modules" + }, + { + "prediction": "Should we rename this to `FLOW_VERSION_2_0`?", + "reference": "isn't AZKABAN_FLOW_VERSION_2_0 more explicit?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Please don't leave an empty default" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the build file.", + "reference": "This isn't directly related, but the `import React from'react';` below should be removed. We never import this directly and any modules from it we need are imported through `@wordpress/element`. This was probably added automatically at some point, but we also provide this automatically via `ProvidePlugin`." + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output. We don't need the 800+ lines of output.", + "reference": "You can also use `echo: false` instead. Either is fine; I'm just pointing it out." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "what's the reason for this moved line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `showTitle` function.", + "reference": "I don't really follow what is happening here, but it looks like this _could_ conflict with the logic on the lines above... should this be an `else if`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "`s => s.IsHidden == false` What's the purpose of adding this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I would name this `clef-ethereum-address`. We already have a bunch of addresses in Bee, and people might wrongly think that this is yet another address" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.", + "reference": "you can just remove this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I think we should avoid creating a dummy CR in the case of SPC. Please see if we can avoid this since we will not be patching anything in this CR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should render this in the view.", + "reference": "Honestly not sure myself, but do you think it makes sense to move this conditional into the partial?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "As discussed in IRC (just so it doesn't get lost): This probably should be `-basedir-`, not `-prefix-`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "basepath can be absoluta path and this needs to be supported" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "Didn't get to the commit message" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this method in the `DesignForDevelopersResourcesController` class. I don't think this is the right place to put this method in the `DesignForDevelopersResourcesController` class. I think it would be better to put this method in the `DesignForDevelopersResourcesController` class.", + "reference": "What about raising `ActionView::MissingTemplate` instead? That's what HighVoltage does." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is it kept for compatibility?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I would find it pretty reasonable to add a MinerSigner method on the state view that puts these together." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this column to the table.", + "reference": "It's stored in `PodDBAdapter.VERSION`. I usually use the expected release version code for that change. As this will be released in AntennaPod 2.2.0, the code would be `2020000`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "What about method name itself? Do we run this for SQL too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the url.", + "reference": "`instanceUrl` should be `cs1.salesforce.com`. `communityUrl` would be `mobilesdk.cs1.my.salesforce.com`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Let's use `if(name!= nullptr)` to remove ambiguity" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "I wonder if it would make sense to have a separate namer for metadata? Metadata files tend to be expressed in a different language from the repo language, and have mutually exclusive concepts. So, `PackageMetadataNamer`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "This rule is quite specific to qbft and so I don't think it should be part of the common rules. Would rather the common bft code didn't know anything about contract based voting/validator governance." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This makes our life harder than it needs to be. A Set is unordered by definition. Please remove this method from Set and add it to SortedSet, but with no default implementation. We need to duplicate it then to LinkedHashSet but that's ok, it is the best we can do. Could you please add it also to SortedMap and LinkedHashMap? We are then able to close the original issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "we can replace `for` with `params.update(response_headers)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Any chance this is available in.NET Core 2.0 now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I wonder if it's necessary to let app pass in the context. What app level context should be sent? If no, is it enough for p2p agent to compose a context with network info there?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why do we need both includes here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "SmartStoreInspectorTest expected results in a certain order" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to log log log log log log log", + "reference": "I think that you need something like `m_using_random_node.emplace(m_io_thread_pool->get_local_thread_id());`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't think we need to maintain a separate set. The problem here is that the \"assignment\" that is killed for this variable is not really an assignment. If we just don't `assign` the variable with the non-existent value, it will not be reported. I pushed a fix." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Let me know if this is too pervasive. It is currently a private method in `BaseTableScan`. It seems both `SparkBatchQueryScan` and `SparkMergeScan` need to know the scan-specific split size when planning tasks. Therefore, I made it open. Another approach is to move all the `planTasks` logic to scan implementations, but for the combine tasks by partition feature, it requires grouping scan tasks by partition first, instead of returning them in an iterator fashion. I'm not sure if this is OK. `SparkMergeScan` also seems to re-implemented its own plan tasks logic." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Not sure what is this change doing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "this is funky. either don't take` minutes` as keyword arg or take both `minutes` and `days` and pass all of them on to `timedelta`. i'm guessing you're aiming for backwards compatibility, but i don't think it's worth it given how confusing this is. atlernatively, make `mins=60*24*30` the default. and that brings me to another issue, `mins=None` is not a very useful default." + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be null.", + "reference": "Please use a tab for indentation instead of spaces." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I can't believe we didn't see this typo before :))" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "If the logger isn't used, it probably doesn't need to be added." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "These files should in `/javascript/brython`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "minor, you can squash these into one `if`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Used regexes to do most of this, hence different methods of string creation of UUIDs. I plan to follow up with an additional change to remove direct references to google/pborman UUID so `uuid.New()` and `uuid.NewRandom()` will instead use our `primitives.UUID`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Add a TODO here to revisit if this was problematic." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Note generally it -> It" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool. I don't think this should be a bool, but I don't think it should be a bool.", + "reference": "Is this relevant to this PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we instead ensure that `opts[:run_in_parellel]` will always be a boolean? Otherwise we'll have to account for the case when it's a non-boolean value in multiple places, such as any/every other `if` statement." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Is this just moved out of the other files? It doesn't seem like this was generated like the other files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I started out doing everything `async`, but it was getting in the way of debugging, so I switched back to all synchronous until I got things working. We should probably move everything back to `async` and remove the synchronous versions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `TestBlockProducer` class.", + "reference": "this looks already too complicated..." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this test fail?", + "reference": "As for the testings, we better to verify the actual effects of the compaction. Of course, you could do it in future." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "should we add a TODO here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "This can be inlined below as `GoogleSitekitDashboardDetails` is an unnecessary wrapper now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "NewVHS -> NewVersionHistories this one looks better" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Is this `@missing_text`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config.yml file.", + "reference": "Minor suggestion, but wouldn't it be cleaner to simply replace PACKAGE_NAME_FORMAT to all the optional path, then check that the path is empty in validate_package_name? We might also want a helper function to pull out the package name and sub-package path." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "we should have a way to insert components into a i18n string. so that we could define a translation string like `'%{filename} is being edited'`, and inject the filename `` at the right place. I imagine there must be a language where the `Editing` text should come after the file name. we can think about that later tho." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Probably want break instead of continue." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this test fail?", + "reference": "This was on purpose that I would set logging (NoLog=false) and a dummy logger below. The idea is to have better code coverage and test of debug/trace statements. Any reason you have removed this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "does adding a `Stream.empty()` help here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.", + "reference": "This is not being used anymore, so can be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Is it called some where?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please remove this extra blank line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "this is really the key, if you don't set this then gradle doesn't wire up the tasks that produce various files inside these configurations as inputs... I think we were just getting lucky before." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Sorry if I'm missing something here, but shouldn't this message be about failing to match with an *empty* selector, and/or perhaps even an empty *tag* instead of selector? The message seems a bit disconnected from what we're testing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\")###################################################################)#######################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "nit: please move these inside namespace." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think we should have a flag for this.", + "reference": "may users try to abuse it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "why is this space removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can we remove this other line now then?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "There's a comma missing here at the end :wink:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Why is this not required any longer?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `admin.go`", + "reference": "Indentation seems a bit fucked up here. Run `go fmt`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "any chance in == nil? same below" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "We would change the source code of h2o so that certain syscalls will be invoked through the `h2o_sysfn` macro." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to use `` instead of ``", + "reference": "the name kTimelineCannotBeSignalled is confusing. It's not that a TimelineSemphore cannot be signaled... it's the \"VK_KHR_timeline_semaphore is enabled *variant* of the \"binary cannot be signaled\" message. We should probably have a consistent naming scheme to clarify. kBinaryCannotBeSignalledAltTimeline or hide the complexity in Get*VUID functions as needed somehow (pass in the extension structure?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Could you add a type hint? `percentiles: Optional[List[float]] = None`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend]))]))]))]))]))])])]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]2]]]]]]]2]]]]]]2]]]]2]]]2]]]2]]]]]]2]2]2]2]2]]]2]2]2]2]2]2]", + "reference": "Maybe putting ones they've used before first would be good, but this is fine for now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't think we need these. Simpler just to put `routetable.TargetType...` inline below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `parallel` dispatcher.", + "reference": "Why this instead of the old way?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `", + "reference": "Just combining the inner if/else blocks like this is what I originally meant (I didn't mean replacing all the invisible checks in the outer if, I realize that would have been a functionality change regarding the rule) This should now be equivalent to `if (RuleB(Pets, LivelikeBreakCharmOnInvis) || IsInvisible(formerpet))` (the second check for the rule being false after the `||` would be implied, anything after the `||` would only be evaluated if the rule was false)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We don't want to write this back to the definition do we? Probably just want to create a local variable for it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should clearCurrentlyPlayingTemporaryPlaybackSpeed()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()", + "reference": "Good catch! Could you please move this to `PlaybackService.this.onPlaybackEnded`? I think it's more clean if everything is in one single place." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "We're trying to avoid X.org specific code. So I'm not a fan of this. Can't this be achieved in display server agnostic way?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This class can be removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `grpc_prometheus` file.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "To minimize the possibility of regret, perhaps we name this `ZapLogger`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the plan_name here. I don't think we should change the plan_name here.", + "reference": "This looks a little weird, but it's a feature of the gem we're using. You can give it a symbol representing the method you want called on current_user." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this file.", + "reference": "`Anomaly` imported here, but not used. Please run the changed files through pylint with nupic pylint config and fix pylint findings related to your changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a new test.", + "reference": "We needed this testutils file after all" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "line is 161 characters (from `lll`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please re-format/groupimport this line. You might need a little manual work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "minor, you can just use `wf` instead of `worker.wf`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I would suggest putting this in the resources directory with the same package as of this test class. Then you can utilize the method azkaban.utils.TestUtils#readResource to read it as string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the template to the error list.", + "reference": "could not import github.com/openebs/maya/pkg/upgrade/templates (invalid package name: \"\") (from `typecheck`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this test.", + "reference": "a official -> an official" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `config.KINESIS_PROVIDER == 'kinesalite'`", + "reference": "I only want the proxy request for this to run for kinesalite." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "White space boya?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe ditch these since `StackSummary` is not used anymore." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def def", + "reference": "suggest to indicate the value range & meaning in docstring" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "not sure if it works with prometheus by default, otherwise we will have to add this into prometheus config also" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the endpoint from the rule renderer.", + "reference": "The rule renderer isn't meant to be stateful so probably best to move this out of here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "passing in a `nil` here just so that the tests can pass in an alternative implementation seems weird, but I don't know what the convention is for doing something like this - @briandowns?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "IMO `dot` should be preferred. Remember `aXe`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Not a huge deal but this will block tests, also, don't they stay open by default now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Could you make it a local constant for now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "What is this `collection_id` field here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is there a reason why we don't use logging for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the exception class.", + "reference": "Exceptions should be placed in application layer -> infrastructure is aware of application - not the other way around" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "IIRC issue mentioned reporting _symbolic message_ - so in this case it would be `line-too-long`." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Is this intended to be `spells[spell_id].reflectable` here? Edit: Should be `spells[spell_id].feedbackable`, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to this table.", + "reference": "How should we set this for existing teams?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It would be nice if we could verify that this is in fact the error we expected. But that's a latent issue, something for the backlog." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test file.", + "reference": "I hate then some internal process specific middleware leaks into connection manager :( todo later." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this will be necessary.", + "reference": "Reflects where these files were moved for `pkg_resources`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should be computed('i18n.locale'...." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should add a test for this. I don't think we need to override it for the test.", + "reference": "Can you explain to me what goes wrong here? Can the test be adjusted to set up working routing instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We can get rid of this import then." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Not sure how useful is unlock event." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Consider make the second argument a `encoderOptions` which includes the `lowercaseFields` just like opening a collection." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "What is the value of renaming this to `ctx`? We generally prefer the longer names because they are easier to read and to type." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Hm. This could be a case of left-sided driving, having u-turn lanes on the right side. Good catch, but looks good to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "There was a [JsonPropertyName(\"success\")] here it did serialize fine for me, so I am not sure what was the matter? Also maybe uppercase?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "we can just use read env here, pretty sure" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))###########################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "Could you replace local hook with global hook `afterModifyTransformStart`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `clear()` instead of `clear()`", + "reference": "You seem to be basing your PRs off an commit, which keeps reintroducing these changes, which makes it harder to review your PRs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `assert(typeof opt_port!== 'function', not port (mocha callback)));", + "reference": "Maybe it would simpler to ignore opt_port if type!== 'number'?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.", + "reference": "As far as I can tell, `IDictionary` implements `IEnumerable>` so we are just making it more generic. From the issue, I understood that we want to maintain sequence/order. I believe `IEnumerable<>` won't fix the issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to log this?", + "reference": "This change prevents a user understanding how their server is configured. Best to leave at `info` level." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I will add the following to the list: - api.SpecScale - api.SpecSticky" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "As defaultSendPort is being removed, and I don't like TODOs on examples, please remove the whole line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `float` instead of `float`.", + "reference": "since we are now no longer expecting an input of float to return an empty string, i have removed this test case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It would be cleaner if you were to pack the name&desc in a `MetricName` and pass it to `MakeCounter`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Do you know why do we need this?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "I guess this using is what causes the build to fail" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I like the explicit unregister approach." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "We should able to use 0x30 as summary, and make 0x80 reserved for future." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "This allows strategic exclusion of http spans." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "why not just `string[]` instead of nullable" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "How does this work? Why isn't each tag after the first picked up as a new arg/flag?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a resource id, not a resource id.", + "reference": "This key is actually yet to be determined. Meeting with the backend team and Garner to discuss." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Why remove the crash protection? We're just going to get a bug filed on it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Maybe be consistent and name it `FRAME_OPTIONS`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This check/exception is a guard for the next few lines of code. It shouldn't be necessary now. In fact, I don't think you need the if (parentConnection.type == Blockly.INPUT_VALUE) branch at all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Could probably move these constants too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not stop server on missing pinginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginginging", + "reference": "Maybe 'failed' instead of'missing'. Also do we really need to write ticket numbers here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Test used to use old bouncycastle dependency which isn't needed anymore from Hadoop. Switched to use builtin Java split." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `VoiceInfo(identifier,v.name,l)`", + "reference": "nit: I think this would be more readable as \"Some language names contain Unicode characters\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "This file is covered by GNU General Public License.", + "reference": "Thanks for adding the header, but I don't think 2017 is a very accurate guess here. Could you do a quick search with git blame and change this accordingly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Oh interesting - does web-test-runner not resolve package.json files?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the ariaDayPrefix here. I think we should add the ariaDayPrefix here.", + "reference": "Is there a way to derive this value from the locale itself? I feel hardcoding the prefix in the props isn't the right approach, but I'm not sure what the locale file contains exactly." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))) #))))))))))", + "reference": "I'd much rather see these warnings in our devtools (`debug/index.js`). Strings contribute quite a bit to our file size and moving them there would prevent bloating core." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Use `String.format(Locale.US,...) to avoid the `Lint` warning." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: ServiceReference represents a reference to a v1.Service." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "since it changes to the array, how about change the name to `DeviceNames`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Can we avoid this. upgrade engine code should take care of this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `TOKEN_EXP_DEFAULT`", + "reference": "should also be alphabetized or at least grouped and alphabetized within group" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "No need for this, as pylint already only turns things off for this function and it's needed for the entire function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "nit: can we remove \"can't\" from the error message?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a new request phase to the volume replica controller.", + "reference": "instead of modifying 'Status' which impacts the state diagram, how about using some annotations on CVR? This can probably help for our upgrade as well. Is this possible? cc: @AmitKumarDas" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `https://packages.cloud.google.com/yum/repos/kubernetes-el7-x86_64`", + "reference": "Rename this as KubernetesGPGURL - >KubernetesUbuntuGPGURL, Modify it where ever it is used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the top of the file.", + "reference": "I'm not totally sure I like the idea of putting a default fee here, but I guess so long as we make sure to track the default fee of bitcoin core, we're good. We should really also take a look at the byte size of the transaction, and use that to determine what the fee should be. But that could also be a different PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "oh yeah, `tail`, `update`, `prepend`, `append`, `subSequence`, `trim` just became effectively constant (without memory leak) :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Can you add back a deprecated `destroyLinks` method for backward compatibility? It can simply proxy `destroyResourceLinks`, and we can remove it in the next major release." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "A reminder that we should discuss whether to rename this to \"sockets\" or \"listeners\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "Why not just use eprosima::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtps::fastrtpsParticipant", + "reference": "Why do you need to include this using declaration?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error error error error", + "reference": "@halter73 where is this file generated from?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This is an auto-generated file.", + "reference": "What do these `#if TRUE` accomplish?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Probably a good optimization to have this, but I don't think it's strictly required. For \"legacy\" Activity flows we pass them through an ActivitySource for sampling. So the logic below should also catch these?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `mailer.view_request_cta` in `mailer.view_request_cta`", + "reference": "@jessieay Intentionally moving away from passing a param?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new line if you don't.", + "reference": "I think you could condense this code considerably by getting rid of the initialization and foreach loop and simply saying: `$firstname = trim(implode(' ', $nameArr));` What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "hmm, we actually should _add_ `'use strict'` everywhere" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "it's not just fetching override properties here, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "Is it worth logging the error?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "What's the point of this class?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I'm being picky here, but I think I would prefer `toggle` to be kept here and just change the condition to `contentType!=='movies' && contentType!=='mixed'` or `!['movies','mixed'].includes(contentType)`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please put this down with the other \"github.com\" imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `void` instead of `void`", + "reference": "Minor but probably want `push_front_preference` to have a trailing `_a` to be consistent with the other parameter" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `inclusiveManifestEvaluator` class.", + "reference": "Nit: the formatting is a bit off. I would expect this to be 2 indentations from `this.expr =...` but this is 8 spaces, not 4. Also, most places leave the `);` on the last line of the method arguments." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Ack, @chrisdunelm snuck this class extension past me. This is not a pattern I want to have used..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `main` file.", + "reference": "nitpick: I wonder if we should name it `flush` only (?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `GaugeOpts` method.", + "reference": "Why gauges, not counters?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Just making a note here that this may break pre GWs between pre 2.2.0 and 2.2.0 servers. Not sure, will have to experiment/dig a bit more." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a case of POD_FAILED or POD_FAILED.", + "reference": "Shall we rename this status to CONTAINER_FAILED? ^^ cc: @sshardool" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "Thinking out loud here: I believe the only reason we need `peer.ID` as a parameter to this method is because we are not persisting blocks from pubsub (instead we are refetching them). If nodes persist the blocks they received over pubsub then I think we can guarantee peers we share a connection with (i.e. that are in the peer tracker) will always have the blocks we are fetching (else how would have we gotten the pubsub message). I imagine the concept of an `initialPeer` can go away once #2962 lands since the peers in the tracker will have the block. Although I don't think that covers the case of fetching blocks our peers have deemed semantically invalid and thus not stored..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I know it has no effect but my eyes can't help. Is that line not too long?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Does that mean we disable service loop prevention for packet generated by local host?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.", + "reference": "It seems a little odd to have both `host.is_cygwin?` *and* `host.cygwin_installed?` defined (with a possibility of having `is_cygwin?` be `true`, but `cygwin_installed?` returning `false`). Do the docs clearly explain the difference?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Does this mean manifests will be written with the v2 schema (i.e. with sequence numbers) even though `TableMetadata` is v1 and the manifest list is written with v1? And this should work because we do a projection on read and sequence number is optional?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Should we be sharing this property key with the read? Maybe it should be belong to the file-scan-task object itself?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `build` file.", + "reference": "Nice! Good idea to move these out of the main struct." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Thanks for paying attention to other places this might happen. This one is particularly important; I probably never should have gotten in the habit of CheckErr(), since it does a log.Panic() explicitly, which looks like something else until you look closely. It's supposed to be used places where \"can't happen\" but Things Can Happen." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not change the type.", + "reference": "Converting this to an enum makes it obvious that I combined things that don't really belong together. It would probably be better to create two enums `StoreType` and `TransportType` (in more appropriate locations). That also makes it necessary to have (at least) two `ServerSettings` classes. `IncomingServerSettings` and `OutgoingServerSettings`. Also, the naming is inconsistent. Maybe it would be better to make the string that is used for import/export explicit, e.g. WEBDAV(\"WebDAV\")." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It's out of scope for this PR, but I don't find this utility's name to be particularly intuitive. It speaks to nothing of what it does. Does it create a token list? Process one? Get one? `tokenListToArray` would be nice." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "The message for this check used the existence of a label to determine the output, which doesn't work with the current schema. So I updated it since the data only needed to know a label was present and not what it was." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: \"The current project does not have requested application\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Extend Unit test for this class" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "This is this a copy / paste error from above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "this package has to be renamed to `typeinference`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a test?", + "reference": "This cancels the above null-check I guess." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "change to timerIntervalInMillis" + }, + { + "prediction": "This administrator does not belong to any rules. This administrator does not belong to any rules.", + "reference": "`any rules` should be `any roles`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Why does the method need to be renamed? I would just keep the old name and update the other uses (which are only tests). That way, we can reduce code duplication." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'm not sure if this is going to work - I think it's fine to keep them hardcoded here, as the statusbar can still show `:`, `/` and `?` even if the key is rebound." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "@tmetzke shouldn't we replace this library with the `2.12.1` instead of removing it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed.", + "reference": "uint64 seems excessive here. Should we reduce to a uint32 @whyrusleeping?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Hmm, I thought this was getting used. These are used elsewhere as a cached value (in `svc deploy` it's `o.targetApp`) but I guess since storage doesn't actually need to validate that the app exists, just that there are local services, we never used it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "To keep it simple, how would you feel about just using r.RemoteAddr? Since every request comes through here I want it to be as lean as possible. Frankly I'm OK with the port showing up in the log; maybe it'd even be useful to someone." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "grant bonus depends on both `admin{}` stored in statedb, and `P2Start/End` in local struct, which is kind of weird at Kamchatka height, we add the bonus Start/End epoch into `admin{}`, so it solely depends on `admin{}` stored in statedb" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Use single quote to wrap the str." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "Is the plan to rename this later?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "Is there a reason why we need a special case for Email at this point? Is the idea that other methods can turn into Email even if it's not configured as a top-level option?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not panic if the directory is not empty.", + "reference": "This wording is a bit ambiguos, I first thought it meant the directory has no entries in it. maybe \"dir\" -> \"dir string\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "Why do we need both `HPX::m_hpx_initialized` and `HPX:: m_was_initialized`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "also check RPCName?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Remove unused import" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I assume there will never be a scenario where justValidate is expected to be true on a restart" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Report listeners are synchronized, even 'though the cache is thread-safe... I've not profiled it, but it may be a cause of contingency. Any better way around this? Also, do listeners **really** need to be synchronized? Can't we just make them thread-safe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I don't think this is correct. When `compiler` is not given in `.travis.yml`, the announcement will be `--version`, which results in \"`command not found`\" (though not critical), and the cache slug will lack this information (also not critical)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Why do this rather than `args = []` in the function signature?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we probably *should* do validation of whether there is a suitable implementation if local-validation is true. I'm not sure how useful that actually is though" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "@StrikerRUS here may need to concat two data by col." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why the space?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the description to \"ZalcanoTitle\"", + "reference": "please resolve the extra indentation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "More proof that this check is needed always." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`m_al_comms` now contains smart pointers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Did you do a test run with the compare script? I'm nervous about what happens on all the generators..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "For a client, we store host, as string c.host. That is what we use for monitoring and statsz. Not sure if its useful here or not. Looks like probably not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "This change is suspicious. Why did the number of partitions increase?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `proposal_policy.rb` file.", + "reference": "I'm still new to this area, so please forgive what may be a stupid question: When would this be false? And do we have a test for that situation?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Should there be any changes to this file at all?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The only field being used is the KeyType; Instead, we can probably just make a `keyType` variable here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "This should be done by code-gen change happening in the hydra repo. I am tweaking it just to get CI into a 'passing' state" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Cleaned up when I originally added support for passing `screenContext` here (and later `viewContext`) but that was removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This looks like a bunch of whitespace fixing that's unrelated. Can you revert?" + }, + { + "prediction": "DoctrineBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\FixturesBundle\\Fixtures", + "reference": "should be removed instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.", + "reference": "should use randomization?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return an error.", + "reference": "returning nil because we want to mayactl to exit with 0 status code." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Is this change relevant to the PR? (and I believe we should use `text/plain` considering the fact that it can be displayed using web browsers...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "`[Flags]` is now auto-generated by an argument to the `EnumHint`. (The attributes happen to come out in this order. I don't think it's worth controlling the order.) #Resolved" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message. I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "I think same here - in general we don't need to use Setters / Getters since configParams isn't a public API." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why using `fmt.Sprintf` where `fmt.Sprint` would do the work (notice no `f` in function name)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Extraneous blank line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "nit: syntax : neither -> nor" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Is it safe to assume that these two keys are always present? `this[string]` will throw a `KeyNotFoundException` if they are not." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Is the `flowDefinitionId` sufficient to uniquely identify the flow or does it need to be the tuple ``?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Shouldn't it be in the reverse order? `DateTime::createFromInterface()` returns `self` and accepts `DateTimeInterface`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if file.type is set in the file object.", + "reference": "this check is now redundant. The rest of the function downwards basically does the same thing but with safer checks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Please could you remove the useless space." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "What's the point of this block (and isn't it effectively dead code)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Newline at end of file plz" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-", + "reference": "Can this be refactored to avoid including the aws sdk in the types that we expose? I know it's not being exposed directly through the types we expose, but I do worry that it might make it easier to accidentally do that in the future and not realize it as easily." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Hi thomas, i would propose to indicate in the name, that only the indextime is updated, otherwise somebody might think the whole items is getting updated. I would propose something like \"updateIndexTimeByItem(Item $item)\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "This is not the right exception class. There is an InvalidSelectorException class that covers bad locators." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be included in Kokkos_CudaSpace.hpp", + "reference": "I assume this came from format?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ReIndexTask` class.", + "reference": "I'd suggest a default value of `false` just to make sure existing tasks are ok when they get deserialized after an update to a version containing this code." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Do we really need this? Seems like it would pollute the logs pretty badly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`Vector.Count` should Jit to const when intrinsic; not sure when `Vector.IsHardwareAccelerated == false` ; however we know `readonly static int` does Jit to const." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Can we use a skipIf decorator instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Missing version tags" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to use `print_plan_info` instead of `print_plan_info`.", + "reference": "I think this should also filter out `validate_resolve_reference` hooks." + }, + { + "prediction": "?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????)??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????", + "reference": "unrelated, but required fix as metrics branch got broken with the latest main->metrics merge and conflict resolution." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.", + "reference": "Feel free to remove this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a link here.", + "reference": "~~Should this match the key updated above?~~ :+1:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`gofmt` allows a more compact form `defer func() { _ = f.Close() }()` or just add `// nolint:errcheck` before `defer`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "collateral is in FIL" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We should not create channel of node which are not connected." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the constructor. I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think the docstring should say something like \"Alias for the `source` option\" or something similar." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Please use properties without suffix `_fr` so they can work across different languages as @teolemon mentioned" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Declaration here is `static` but the definition at the bottom is non-static?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate file for this.", + "reference": "Hi @myml, thanks for the contribution! `blob` and `blob/driver` are both in the same module, so you shouldn't need to split this change up into multiple Pull Requests. Also, I'd like to see it working, including the implementation for `s3blob` and `gcsblob` (these should be easy, just pass-through to the provider) and `fileblob` (might be trickier...), and a test in `drivertest/drivertest.go`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Was it a bug?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "# `attr_value['string'] is not None` probably not required as `attr_value['string'] == value` check is already being done" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "You're accessing private variables here - `last_hovered_link` should be public in `TabData`. As for `tabbed_browser._now_focused`, I think you can use `tabbed_browser.widget.currentWidget()` instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "We should file a bug for this - we don't need the extensions class if there are no operations on the client" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the path from the mounter?", + "reference": "Is it possible to import from k8s instead of copy in? :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to pass this to `processSuccessfulRun`", + "reference": "`@param float` can be dropped here." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "maybe we can leave this change un-reverted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "I wouldn't make MethodDeclarator an AccessNode, nor an Annotatable. It's the MethodDeclaration that can be annotated, and has info about the modifiers, and is already an AccessNode" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to PlayerHeadIconChanged and move it to PlayerHeadIconChanged.", + "reference": "delete this class" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))((((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Replacing `+` (1 or more) with `*` (0 or more) would've also done the trick." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I've been meaning to fix this for a while. Thanks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove A and B from the pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline pipeline", + "reference": "This is adding multiple processor pipelines. I guess you wanted to add multiple processors to the same, single pipeline?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "If you need str(x[0]) here, you'll probably need str(x) the line after that I suppose. Also, shouldn't we use `raw()` here instead of `str()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "3.6 seconds? what does it stand for?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If the command fails, is stdout nil or \"\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the API version here.", + "reference": "Why is api-version now removed in the generated code?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "We may register all built-in optimizers of PyTorch here to simplify the builder." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())(((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "No need for this new variable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "doesn't this enqueue a double render or is that safeguarded somehow" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "But now you may get DATA RACE reports because c.acc is sometimes changed. I wonder if we should not rework that whole sending subs through route." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Use `ADIADIOS2_HAVE_HDF5`, not `ADIOS_HAVE_PHDF5`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Would be nice to put this in a separate context named `\"with a string and a non-string\"` (since that's what it is -- it's definitely not a non-string and a string!)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Should MAX_PERTABLE_ENTRY here be 10?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should move these out of frame into a static class? Similar to reason phrases?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "That means we still create `UseLane` instructions but threat them like `Suppressed`? Can we maybe change this in the pre-processing so that we will just emit `Suppress` instructions in these cases?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "no need to move here, iotex-proto is outside of iotex-core and considered same as iotex-address, go-pkgs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a new file.", + "reference": "Looks like a clang-format style violation: should turn Travis red." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the tests.", + "reference": "I think we need some YARD docs here, particularly to list all the color symbols that are valid. Otherwise users will have to look at the source to discover that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Not sure if this needs a doc block or not since it's completely internal, but for cleaning this up. (@felixarntz docs?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The change here is to address what exactly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.", + "reference": "Is this really an Option? IIUC, you compute it automatically for the URLOpener case, why would we require a user to fill it in when using the constructor? I.e., can't we drop this and use `adal.MSIAvailable` instead? If that call is expensive, cache it on `bucket`, not `Options`." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::", + "reference": "Was this done automatically or by hand?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the target from all child groups. I think we should remove the target from all child groups.", + "reference": "This looks like it will only work for the first child, since after that we've overridden `desired_group`. Should we have a separate variable for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to get the error, but I'm not sure how to get the error.", + "reference": "Should this be a constant somewhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: sort alphabetically." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate class.", + "reference": "Now, It's redundant, I suppose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: The format recognized by tooling is `// Deprecated: [..]` so you likely want this to be, // Deprecated: Use \"go.uber.org/yarpc/peer/peerlist/v2\".Implementation instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "nit: 1. when formatting input strings, make sure to place them in quotes so we could identify white space issues. i.e. '%s' 2. If there is untyped, non-nil error, you want to log the error string as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "I believe this can be fixed with the original code if you just omit the \".dll\" file extension so it reads `[DllImport(\"Datadog.Trace.ClrProfiler.Native\")]`. On Windows it would look for `Datadog.Trace.ClrProfiler.Native.dll` and Linux/Mac it would look for `Datadog.Trace.ClrProfiler.Native.so`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "couldn't we just read the boolean as a string (I would assume that this return \"true\" or \"false\"), migrate if to its new value and keep using the same pref key?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "If these variables are only used in main function, move these to the beginning of that function. If there is a foreseeable reason to have them as global statics just let me know." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "This one was wrong." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "What happens if nodes throughout a hierarchy are modified (as they would be)? It looks like we're going to `Reset` once for each `NodeID` affected." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "> Note that allocation of vmheap fails upon initializing dynamoRIO 64 on WoW64 processes. Thus, we need to pass -reachable_heap to avoid having to make this allocation. This should be solved by changing the default `vmheap_size` to be much smaller than 8GB for x64 DR inside WOW64." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is it really worth expanding our public API for this? After all, isn't calling this the same as calling `notification.fully_formatted(...).lines`? If so, I'd rather not widen our API (and thus, increase our maintenance burden) when it's so simple to get all the lines already." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Is it necessary to keep this class around just to define this constant? Or can we place it somewhere else?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Question - do we cache NetworkPolicy itself? If so, here we can point to NetworkPolicy?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "For my view, `Register` means the process of **insert node resource to etcd through api-server**, which is called by upstream rather than here, how about changing the func name to `OnConnected`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the telemetry enabled on the first engine start.", + "reference": "I would prefer an active verb for this property, e.g. `initializeTelemetry`. The reason is that this property refers to something the engine does once on startup. Other properties that use passive voice (e.g. `authorizationEnabled`) refer to a state of the engine during its lifetime." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "please use new line to maintain reasonable line width" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context.", + "reference": "I would skip this check or add an internal server error response." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to updateBranding() here.", + "reference": "missing `{` here (and then `}` after `notary_password = config.notary_password`); it's only going to do the first one" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "This is odd because it's actually in our generated SiteSettingsPath, not in the SiteLocalSettingsPath (wp-config-ddev.php). Are these two files swapped somehow? I'd expect SiteSettingsPath to be wp-config.php and SiteLocalSettingsPath to be wp-config-ddev.php. BTW, I'm *way* ok with renaming that to SiteDdevSettingsPath." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "It seems like this must necessarily be a stopgap. Can you please add a TODO(#xyz) to point to the appropriate issue?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is the return signature necessary since we never actually return if there is a problem (I'm referring to the call to `logrus.Fatalf`). Let's pick a pattern and stick with it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "@btecu why is this override needed here? I'm not seeing a `new` being used here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to closeConnection here.", + "reference": "Should it not be more something like: `MaxAccountConnectionsExceeded` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "minor: use a non-default CE service account for testing (since default is handled in a specific way in the code)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to run test against sectors with larger sector size.", + "reference": "This is how I ran the 512MiB test. It's probably too much data for a fixture, and makes for longer functional tests (although still less than a minute on my laptop)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "So we weren't able to hide the fact that the file wasn't pre-generated and had to introduce this \"option\" to detect that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Should we expose the maps as public variables to document the mappings?", + "reference": "Agree that exporting these maps is the best tradeoff, just registering my ongoing discontent with the lack of `const` collections." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `", + "reference": "This could probably use `const` as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "it doesn't look like these need to be exported?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I think you should remove \"fmt\" here. And change `fmt.Errorf` to `errors.Errorf`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this column to the migration.", + "reference": "Here's the `resources` attribute @jferris. I'm not against renaming `Product` to `Resource`, and this one... something else." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "If the context is unused, this is equivalent to `var wg errgroup.Group`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant, but I don't think it should be a constant.", + "reference": "very minor: I'd prefer these two added rows are switched so that fragsizeIsMinimum directly follows fragsize" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Given that 115 returns `True`, why would this be `False` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this test into the `oauth2LoginConfigFormLogin` class.", + "reference": "Please move this test method just below `oauth2LoginWithOneClientConfiguredThenRedirectForAuthorization()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Why this new configuration?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "I don't think that we need to check `hasArray` here. I think the reason why this didn't previously check `hasArray` is that the array passed to `DataByteArray` must start at offset 0 and be valid through the array length, so a copy was needed in almost every case. It may be simpler to change this to use `ByteBuffers.toByteArray` and pass the result to create `DataByteArray`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the `spanReference` parameter.", + "reference": "`spanReference` -> `baggage`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why the `/-/verdaccio/`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Has been waiting for a million years" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to be a valid enum value. I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "Minor grammar detail: the 'than' is unnecessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I think you can just simply fix this line to `self[:2].to_pandas()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "if we are returning the `ws` here when passing in `se:cdp` we can just return it straight or do we have to make a request to get the `ws` address?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I could add a resolver for this (like above) but it seems more sensible to just change the one reference!" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "not sure \"actual\" adds value - secondsSinceParent is probably closer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [94/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message here. I think we should change the error message to say \"You cannot delete any item. You should modify the existing item. You should modify the existing item.\"", + "reference": "The error should be `At least :number items are required`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "singleCaseSwitch: should rewrite switch statement to if statement (from `gocritic`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Could combine this with `encryptionKeyGetter` to have a single `keyGetter` interface. I'm not sure which way is better." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Is there any security issue here? If we integrate with Hive security (and I don't know if we have or not) is there some notion of re-authentication at connection time?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Does this mean we do not support writeConcern on `createCollection`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I guess `sid` was for `sessionID`, but now it looks strange: `sid.ID`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We'll need `infrav1.SecurityGroupBastion` as well" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "This `fileName` should probably be `remote` and be relative to the Fs root as per normal rclone usage." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "That way we are back to having just one index on k_0 So we can really compare the execution times with and without re-indexing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Expression that uses a negation pattern to exclude all characters that aren't in the expression." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new header.", + "reference": "Similar to my suggestion for HTTP, let's remove this and use `ServiceHeader` instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The serviceDirOnHost[0:1] was completely wrong. It wasn't just Windows, glad you got this fixed!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Would membership take 10+ seconds to detect the failed node?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not raise an exception.", + "reference": "hmm, in this case perhaps the whole try-except could be removed altogether? because if the file does not exist, it's already returning `None`. In any other case it should actually probably fail with the exception, no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This function does not need to be public" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Any chance we can get a CSS class for this? I know it's just in one place but feels like a dangerous precedent to set." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"", + "reference": "> && this.Extensions.ContainsKey(\"nextMethodName\") [](start = 96, length = 48) From line 124, looks like we don't need `&& this.Extensions.ContainsKey(\"nextMethodName\")` condition or we don't need line 124 #Closed" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Moving this code from compat to core shaves 47 bytes out of compat and only adds 6 bytes to core so I thought it was worth it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Please use \".NET Core 3\" - i'm trying hard to use one form, and this is the one MS advices" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Unrelated to this change, but this is a fix for when TestDoStartCgroupInitHappyPath has a failure after the test goroutine has already exited." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Hmm, I'd really expect this to work, and yet it doesn't. I'll investigate later, though it might get Monday until I get the time." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))())(((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Does this changes affect process building dynamic libraries anyhow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Could you limit what is imported here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this way.", + "reference": "just to clarify - on line 1074 we update `zip_file_content` for non-local lambdas, but never store it, which means lambda never picks it up" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Golang naming convention is to use camel case `icmpPktWithTypeCode` Often the linter will complain" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We can do away with assigning the response here too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Bumping the newViewportHeight" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Is this change correct? Looks like a typo and not sure this should be changed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I checked the tests coverage and strangely it look like those three lines are not covered (?!). Do you have the same result on your side?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "nit: please try to avoid changing end of the file (it adds a noise to the code review, but does not provide too much value)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation. I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation, but I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation. I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation, but I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation. I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation, so I don't think we need to filter the resource models that are returned from a POST operation.", + "reference": "I don't see the \"only\" part reflected in the code but maybe I'm missing it. Also, the indentation is misleading: the `.SelectMany` calls are perfectly aligned but are *not* operating on the same \"level\". I'd expect the second `SelectMany` to be on the same height as the inner `Where`, just break `pathObj => pathObj.Where` and lines won't be that long." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `plugin_hooks` file.", + "reference": "It seems like most of these will never be nil, are they optional just in case?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "`.addColumn(\"c1\", IntegerType.INT, true)` means `PkHandle=true`, maybe should add `.setPkHandle(true)` in line 31" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "how about `Cannot encode row key with non-integer type` directly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "The method names `fetchUnfinishedExecutions` and `fetchUnfinishedFlows` are too similar to each other. Would it be better to use the name `fetchUnfinishedFlowsMetadata` since you are only fetching metadata info about the flow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Note that `sudo` is not available by default on BSDs; there are a few places in the codebase here where that's explicitly worked around by using `su`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "ultra nit: missing Oxford comma :P" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This is not supported in Spark 3.0.0-rc2 yet. I'd skip this for now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "BLOCKING: Why does `Query` return an `*exec.FunctionSignature`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "please move this down to immediately above the assignment to `c.dirtyBcache`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Don't need the `, err` part since you've already handled it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Please add two additional SECTIONs that show that this also works if the dative bond is in the reactant (reaction SMARTS `[O:1]->[H+]>>[O:1].[H+]`) or in the agents (reaction SMARTS `[O:1][H]>N->[Cu]>[O:1].[H]`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "What happens if the certificate rotation fails and we are prematurely removing this file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "does this change belong here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "This returns an error" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "If we think we might someday write a native nftables backend, do you think it would make sense to just use generic dataplane configuration? e.g, `dataplane = iptables | ebpf | nftables`, but for now selecting `nftables` uses iptables in nft compat mode?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Looks like that helper function is general enough that it should reside in testhelpers" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "This isn't incorrect IMO, but I think it would be better to fix this in drupal7PostStartAction and also in drupal6PostStartAction. It seems to me like those were both somehow neglected on this. Use drupal8PostStartAction as example. Congrats on your first golang PR! Please make sure to test it manually." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this test in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I'd like to ensure that the error message at least has some reference to the flag that is not allowed. Something like `/ERROR(.+)--hosts/` would work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this.", + "reference": "Should we say \"specifying two public subnets\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think it is needed yet.", + "reference": "Issue number? When? Why?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this import is needed.", + "reference": "You should not rely on `PitchCommand` being imported into speech. Please import it from `speech.commands`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Is this a constant used in the Nessie project itself? If so, perhaps you might consider a follow up for adding `NessieCatalogProperties` class at some point, to help make them more clear to users looking to adopt Nessie coming from the Iceberg repo itself" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "maybe we should rename: MinTaskID -> MinTaskIDExclusive, MaxTaskID -> MaxTaskIDInclusive," + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "You may need to make this configurable if we expect people to be able to use the normal Nvidia runtime on other Linux distributions like Ubuntu or Debian." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Originally the DenyExport was a subscribe permission because it meant that if on this LN connection, if we deny export of \"foo\" it means that it would reject a subscription (hence subscribe permission) on \"foo\" from the other side. Now you are changing to simply not allowing this server to publish on \"foo\". I am not saying this is wrong, but we completely flip the meaning." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `internal_instr_disassemble` function.", + "reference": "> k1 src0 src2 -> dst s/src2/src1/ nit: k1 is actually src0 according to instr_get_src(instr, 0) which makes this a little confusing" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "I believe that you meant to have the following on the second one, right? `dataDirStat.Mode()^0077`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "The reason a `ByteCount` is used here, is that the H2 mapping in gQUIC requires this layer violation, which is why `CloseRemote` is not part of the public API. This layer violation will be resolved in IETF QUIC" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell spell", + "reference": "I dig the helper function!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Please add the Copyright header." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Is this the best way to import `FileSystemTarget`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Wait -- os_local_state_t.tid is thread_id_t though, so we need to read a pointer-sized value via READ_TLS_SLOT_IMM, rather than changing these locals to ints. Maybe have a READ_TLS_TIDSZ_SLOT_IMM or sthg." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `ifFailRet` block.", + "reference": "Don't use! in the messages because it isn't used on xplat. There is a SOSPrefix define that can be used (blank on xplat and! on Windows). Do we really need 3 newlines?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "print out what we got here in the error" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Does this need to be global?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Yep, could be simplified. Now looks like other *Map.values() impls" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ApiContext` class. I don't think we should add this to the `ApiContext` class. I don't think we should add this to the `ApiContext` class, but I don't think we should add it to the `ApiContext` class.", + "reference": "This method will be for debug?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "// Key returns the private key for a specified name that was encrypted with the // provided password. If the private key does not exists it creates a new one // with a name and the password, and returns with `created` set to true." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a class.", + "reference": "Adding the type hints revealed that it was necessary to distinguish between a ``PackageEntity`` and a ``ClassEntity``, because the ``ClassEntity`` has additional attributes that were dynamically added in the previous code, which confused ``mypy``." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add_prefix and add_suffix here.", + "reference": "These two functions should be available now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if file has the same size and modTime is set to zero.", + "reference": "`fi` is what the result of Stat is called elsewhere in this file not `finfo`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "I'm confused; are we just dropping these methods without deprecation?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "can we use PC's time to version in Distributed Systems?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `cart.comments.each` method.", + "reference": "is this \"unless\" actually needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "We don't accept empty words for lookup anymore, again" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "We'll have to account for CI installations being faster than local ones. Do y'all think we should leave it at < 30 green / < 50 orange | >= 50 red or lower our thresholds?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "No need for this to be `W3C_` since there is no JWP equivalent" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "As far as I can tell, there's nothing that creates an instance of `Random` or that calls `rand` or `seed`. Am I missing it? If not, let's remove the `Random` class since we don't really need it and we can move the definitions of `shuffle` into `RSpec::Core::Ordering`. One less type :)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this ever actually used?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "this section of the codebase should be noted as a candidate for caching, and as a place where multiple tipsets is making things extra tricky" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `ifififififififififififififififififififififif_AARCHXX()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()", + "reference": "Do we need to save the existing value of the stolen reg somehow?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "maxResults should come from FLAGS once #244 is submitted." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "is this wanted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "What exception is actually happening here? AFAIK `pytest.importorskip` with just return `None` if there's nothing to import. Which means that this check'd always return `True`. `pytest.importorskip` is specifically designed to trigger skipping the current test anyway so I don't know why you would wrap it like this." + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Does it send requests with urlencoded bodies anywhere? I thought it sends only json. Maybe content-type should be `application/json` by default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "I'm not sure about adding more flags here when we're trying to simplify things, I thought we were going to check for patches changes to decide if we needed to update or not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "`testExecutionPb` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this method.", + "reference": "~Method is public and removing it would be a BC Break, you can deprecate it if you want.~" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "this got me a little confused when reading `build.log`. The err is printed with a log.Error later on but that ends up after the stack trace." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "Can we make these more explicitly for Rust only? It seems like JS and Go use flags with their name in them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should unsupported query parameters just be ignored? I think that's more common than error out." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "Actually can we avoid mentioning `Register._UNSET_NAMESPACE`. I thought of it as an implementation detail of the simpler concept of \"being unset\". Perhaps the docs become more natural if we remove the \"If called without arguments or with...\" part and just say \"you have to call this function without arguments at the end of any file it has been used. That is to ensure blah blah\". Something like that. Just a suggestion." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to log the error and log the error.", + "reference": "I assume it raises COMError? If so perhaps best to just catch that specifically, so as to not hide other more critical errors." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add middleware to the stack. I don't think we should add middleware to the stack.", + "reference": "Since minify can generate errors, it should at least go after the errors middleware. And you definitely don't want to be minifying after the gzip writer has closed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `TracerProvider` struct.", + "reference": "nit: we could remove the `config` field as it is a duplicate of the `provider.config` field." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Nit: from the Internet." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "this is internal package, move to bottom and run'make fmt'" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed.", + "reference": "Why is this better than ApplicationStopping?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `http01` or `http01`.", + "reference": "Maybe worth expanding that these 2 are supported by cert-manager but other values exist" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Why was this merged? It should have raised some questions IMO @core23 @OskarStark. It's already in 3 releases now, so we can't revert it can we? How can we fix this? Please have a look at #1065" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "What if `node.jsonRpcConfiguration().getAuthenticationPublicKeyFile()` is empty string, would that cause a problem here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `CertificateSpec` struct.", + "reference": "The `omitempty` struct tag does not do anything for non-pointer structs. I think we may need to consider making both of these fields pointers, so that they are excluded from output when not set, and also to make it easier to compare to the zero value. That said, I'm happy to merge this now and open an issue to verify the behaviour is as we want ahead of cutting v0.6.0." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I think this is should absolutely be `==`, as the interface cannot control the implementation of equals (and it's part of the contract of the enclosing function). Can we add this interface to the exceptions of the rule?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "It looks like the UID is the only other thing that we use from `namespace`, so I suggest to copy that out and lose `namespace`, so we don't have to worry about setting it to nil." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default image here.", + "reference": "Can we define this constant in the`deploy` pkg instead? this would allow us to keep it private" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I don't like this fixture name, should be a noun like `initialized_linter`? But it's outside of the scope of this MR." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Could we keep this as a static reference (JsonPrinter.jsonAsDatasetDto(releasedVersion); and perhaps change the constructor line to just be a static set method and use that here instead? (I suspect it was the warning that'static methods should be accessed in a static manner' from my IDE that caused me to make this change in the first place...) (I can make a PR to your branch if you want.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Keys.COMMAND seems to be an alias to Keys.META. That isn't mentioned?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This should go in `ConfigLocal` (and then re-generate the mocks)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Nitty but entry.get for the same thing" + }, + { + "prediction": "This is the golang entry point for runc init, executed from main() but after libcontainer/nsenter's nsexec(). runtime.GOMAXPROCS(1) runtime.LockOSThread()", + "reference": "Might not hurt to mention the function never returns (since this all ends in `execve`) so `main` never actually runs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "nit: add new line after this block" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "I believe there is some javascript that also uses this 60px number for calculations. I think I'd rather keep the number in px instead of rem to make that correspondence easier to see. If 3.25rem!= 60px, can you also change the other place where `60` is used to in the JS?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "retrying is an installed 3rd party library just like jinja and sendgrid; perhaps try grouping all of them together?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "you could always use List.listIterator with previous() and hasPrevious() to traverse all kinds of j.u.List backwards. No need for special cases for ArrayList and Vector." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "remove the bitmap of index 1 from the list not the 0th one. because when we keep on undoing, it would be better if we end up with the original image rather than some randomly edited image. I am not sure whether only just removing bitmap from the list would clear memory. I think you should call bitmap.recycle before removing that bitmap from the list." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.", + "reference": "this is a existing file so let's keep 2019" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "can you change this instead to just `type.toString()` and then you wouldn't have to expose the getBitMask in the enum. (Alternatively you could have used `type.hashCode()` but that doesn't feel as nice)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "AsReadOnly() would be better here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I suggest that we use `query_based_sync` instead of `partial_sync`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice, but I don't think it's a good practice.", + "reference": "How does the user use this? By converting the type using `As` function and add the header? Maybe add an example on how." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I'm trying to understand the effects of this change. Is setting this to something other than the old default (that is, `initCodeTransformer = new InitCodeTransformer()`) generally necessary, or are we doing this only to support Python?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "\"Constructor\" isn't a standard term in Go or this project, although we use it informally amongst ourselves. And I think it will confuse people coming from languages like Java. So can we leave this as it was?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Why do we have to change the test dir?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This should test the flattened tree instead. details > summary works across shadow tree boundaries." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Not sure I am a big fan of these duplicated Log classes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "It's long-winded, but the convention is to give constants a common prefix which, see `reasonDomainVerified`." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Using lanes later down, this threshold could be reduced for similar effects. Otherwise we look a bit to far." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Let's get more verbose about names. struct `wq_conda_environment`: if it can really only be used for conda. struct `wq_software_environment`: if it has potential use outside of conda." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should we set this back to `false` inside each `t.Run`? so that we can have more than one testcase that can have paginated responses" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "What about using `dataManifests == null || deleteManifests == null`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "The `HitsThresholdChecker` should be created once and shared within the collectors? We also don't need to use the `GlobalHitsThresholdChecker` if the executor is null or if there is a single slice." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `antrea.io/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/antrea/pkg/agent/openflow/cookie`", + "reference": "move this to below `antrea.io` import section" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this method to the `ActivitySource` class.", + "reference": "Seems likely to confuse people. What if we moved it into ActivitySourceAdapter and made it private?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "gas price don't need to be a multiple cuz we support allll gas prices now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We are exposing implementation details in the interface. What if there is no processes involved in an implementation of `ITestRequestSender`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "It would be awesome not to handle the broad exception here. Instead, raise a custom exception, something like `ModelNotSetException`, from the `require_model()`, and then handle it here with a nicer message to tell the user to set the model first." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a separate change.", + "reference": "This already exists under the `theme` lang key, please remove this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to render the HelpMenu here.", + "reference": "Let's add a simple inline HOC around the default export below to provide the value as a prop (no need to introduce a reusable function for this yet)." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/", + "reference": "I believe that you end up printing out the result of the assignment here instead of the netmask." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "We have to update the filename here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "The `--cpp-field-case` looks like `--cpp-field-style` instead of `-case`. - 'unchanged' - leave unchanged (default); - 'upper_camel' -upper camel case; - 'lower_camel' - lower camel case." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "I haven't thought about this a lot yet, but if we were to try this change, we'd still need to keep the code to delete it from the `.origin` file for backcompat." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "In my opinion I think it is possible to add `private final` here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this, but I'm not sure how to fix it.", + "reference": "Feel like \"exit\" doesn't convey that the packet will be dropped. \"drop-and-exit\" or \"error-exit\" maybe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "How do you feel about \"The Main actor\" instead of \"A Main actor\", while we're already here changing the message?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I cannot see that this new permission is used anywhere? And if the new zk handler is covered by `zk-read`, should not also existing `ZookeeperInfoHandler` handler implement PermissionNameProvider and declare the same permission, for consistency?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Is this reasonable?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "We may move this TODO to Line15." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "You have to verify the return type. If it's a reponse, return it. Otherwise do nothing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `void run_stride_unroll(int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int, int", + "reference": "No. Keep the header include and do `extern template...` to skip the instantiation from that compile unit. (I pushed a fix directly to your branch)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "these tests are currently somewhat nonsensical. This code expands to `a, b = {}.keys` when it really should be expanding to `a, b = {}.keys()` -- though fixing this causes the test to fail so I suspect something worse is going on here that I don't quite understand?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Why did this need to change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "/go/pkg/mod/golang.org/x/xerrors@v0.0.0-20190410155217-1f06c39b4373/adaptor_go1_13.go:16:21: Frame not declared by package errors (from `typecheck`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the config name to `collection.configName`.", + "reference": "Probably doesn't go here because I think it's specific to the HTTP API layer. This class is too internal to declare such a name." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.", + "reference": "in preparation of directly writing the /health endpoint one day.. we should have content checks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "question (non-blocking): Is there a benefit from using `%q` instead of `%s`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "I would suggest to keep two empty lines between functions in cpp files" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a test.", + "reference": "This change causes the test to fail on both rocm-1.9.x and rocm-head." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I'd consider moving all fix related stuff to a distinct package to avoid contaminating the base package" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Use `os.path.join` for path concatenation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Use upper case: YOLACTHead, YOLACTProtonet, YOLACTSegmHead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The driver tests should be updated to use the concrete type instead of the driver directly; right now your test coverage of the concrete type is 0%." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid error.", + "reference": "I would prefer the message to be more actionable. Like 'There should be no space between & and the variable name' or something similar." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The image attribute is not supposed to be the text of the node. I'd rather keep it separate (the previous `@Text` attribute was fine). A practical reason for that is in the future, other languages may have a way to get the text of their node, in which case that wouldn't be fetched with `getImage`, for compatibility, but probably with a `getText` method, or `getSourceCode` like in #1728. Also we *may* deprecate or otherwise put `getImage` out of use as soon as 7.0, given its contract is super loose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The `[] +` seems weird to me. Why is it there?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space is too long. [81/80]
    Space is too long. [81/", + "reference": "Not sure if this constant is defined at the right place style-wise. Maybe move it up to before 'belongs_to' like DISCOUNT_TYPES in coupon.rb?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "What about a line with just spaces/tabs? Or a line with a couple spaces followed by a `#`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "if funder_is is not blank (L375) there is not need to check if org_id is not blank (L379) since you will never enter in the if (L374)." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Don't need this-> here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I'm a little concerned about relying on a private module, as they could change the implementation at some point, I'd like to have some test to validate this is working as intended." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "There might other values that we don't support here (eg. `[]`). So it might be safer to check for the supported types instead (string or number)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "FYI, It won't have any benefit to move from trivial types." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "i missed these discussions- but ` \"secrets-ssm-environment-variables\"` is what was agreed upon with cp?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `protobuf` file.", + "reference": "whats the difference between this package and `github.com/golang/protobuf`? or did vscode just decided this was the package it wanted to used?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Just asking: What does this line do? Does it add the stylesheet from the parent to the dialog?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Including the scikit-learn dependency here would pull in scikit-learn for everyone who depends on Dagster. If you put it in the setup.py under docs_snippets, we'd avoid that problem (although I think it's already there)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Why remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test # test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test", + "reference": "Why remove this? It seems like we should keep this around as a regression test, unless we can guarantee this will never be called without a model set (does your new code guarantee that?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Because this defaults to `{}` if `global._googlesitekitUserData?.permissions` is `false`-y, the checks below around `state.capabilities` always result in the `!! capabilities === true` path. This shouldn't have a default value of `{}` if there's the possibility that `global._googlesitekitUserData?.permissions` can be `undefined`/`false`/`null` legitimately." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please add a space after the comma here (generally, with arguments there's always a space after commas)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "From the context, should it say \"Flags defined in this class must be used with caution...\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the tests.", + "reference": "We don't need this file, we can use the one that is in the grid-ui directory" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name to something like \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\" or \"Imported key for account %s\"", + "reference": "\"Exported key for account\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Normally we use Environment.NewLine unless you really want it to always be \\r\\n" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "why did you remove `verifyHeaders`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the user registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration registration", + "reference": "Thanks for cleaning up these deprecated calls" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "@akarve this breaks error catching logic on the front end, I'll fix this. That's why I prefer to use some machine-friendly error codes that won't change frequently." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We support process remoteQuery for Service. Why are we removing it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This is specifically for testing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove the `getStatistics` method.", + "reference": "I think this is related to the social stats and probably does not need to be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Yep, jsdoc again.. It seems that when the plugin description is wrapped within `eslint-disable/enable` expression it's not generated at all. After adding the `@class AutoColumnSize` tag right after the `@plugin` tag the plugin appears in the docs. Please review the other plugins." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This usage of the result doesn't look quite right. I would not expect the first page of values to be empty if there were multiple pages of results. This also obscures the error case when no values are returned (handled in the next `if` block) by returning a more generic error from the Azure SDK from `result.NextWithContext()`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "unknown field AddressDetails in struct literal (from `typecheck`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Just noticed, are we specifically missing the addition of `SharedConfigState: session.SharedConfigEnable`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not null?", + "reference": "Not sure what this is. Bad merge?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think this may be a RW lock." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Perhaps we should tuck this away into a dedicated subdir and name it `config` or something similar? Or maybe it would be happy living in `common`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Doing a select query inside of a loop like this is not ideal. We should fetch recipes once and then loop through it in memory to perform this check" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "too long here. (104 > 100)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `catch(KeyNotFoundException)`", + "reference": "Use TryGetValue instead of catching exception" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a static cast.", + "reference": "I think this method should be either: - a static method of `RTPSWriter` to avoid a StatelessWriter redefinition of the function. - a setter in the `CacheChange_t` struct." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "You add a stream back reference for trailers, and all of the sudden we have tight coupling!" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I don't think we use `AspNetAmbientContext` anymore since. We can probably delete this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please avoid committing build artifacts, as they produce unnecessary conflicts and noise." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry retry", + "reference": "this is vendored code so i would hesitate to make random changes to it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model. I don't think we should add this to the model.", + "reference": "We are using a different style for JSON tags. `ethAddress` - camalCase `referral_code` - snake_case" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should this be `\"Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.DefaultHttpContext\"`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "removed asserts from `Vector` as it's stable enough and it may hinder inlining, even if turned off :/" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's worth it, but I think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Do we want to raise on the function or on the decorator?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "How complex is to to replace `album_*` with `release_*` everywhere in the `Listen` class and places that use it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "You haven't changed any of the callers of `.Add` to check the return value, so we're now ignoring duplicates. Please fix that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "@straker should this not push to `vnode._cache.isHiddenWithCSS`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "\"an interface\" in conceptual sense vs \"interfaces\" or \"set of interfaces\", referring to the Go interfaces - database/sql uses the latter, should we?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.", + "reference": "This now checks nearly all errors that can occur. How about explicitly listing cases where we want it to retry? I think there are not many cases where we want that, as the many added conditions in the last years show :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed.", + "reference": "Can you make this accept an action instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `create` method.", + "reference": "Tab inconsistency here (3 spaces instead of 2 spaces)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `EpochRewardStr`.", + "reference": "these change means we are changing epoch to 1 hour?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Why this is defined in the middle of imports?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Could you move this to the original position?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Is there a test that'd have caught this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "ListWorkflowExecutionsRequest <- this can be nil?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Do we need to continue to support the old link, or is it dead dead dead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to filter out tags with empty keys or empty values, and trim whitespace.", + "reference": "Do we need `ConcurrentDictionary`? `Dictionary` can be safely read from multiple threads. See `GlobalTags`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "this seems like more of a Debugf statement" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into a separate function. I don't think that's a good way to do this.", + "reference": "We're capturing cb_state non-const, but the function is const so, safe enough, but after going to reader/writer locks we're all going to have to key a careful eye on anything in this pattern." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Probably want to wrap the endpoint discovery work that follows in this `if` statement instead of returning early. This will make it easier to add additional request code generation logic in the future. e.g. if we add any code generation after the endpoint discovery block this check will cause it to be skipped." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This test was giving a false positive because my change caused it to throw a different error that contained `createElement` when it should've been throwing this error. Caught this by looking at the code coverage and noticing that the line under the condition I changed was no longer covered lol." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into `initHostNetworkFlows()`", + "reference": "I think this is added to wrong file. You wanted to add to cmd/agent/, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the element element element element elementTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextText", + "reference": "Each `ExpectedCondition` implements `java.util.Function` These are expected to be stateless. This condition will leak previous `elementText` on the second usage, which doesn't seem ideal." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Could we consider a more explicit name, like `devicePciAddress`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Why change this from a foreach? I can't see it gaining anything here and code styles shouldn't change just for the sake of it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Is this supposed to be part of this PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "DRY, worth extracting this method to axe.utils" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I think there's another spot for this in DefaultCapabilityMatcher" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`QtOSError` inherits `OSError`, so I don't think it's needed to list them both here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log.", + "reference": "Instead of patching vendor, let's update the version of sdk-go to a more recent one that doesn't have this line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Don't think this should be here. The default is set somewhere else." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `stop_test` method.", + "reference": "Not really important in this PR, but does BlazeMeter describe \"progress\" values anywhere? It might be nice to have a set of constants like `PROGRESS_DOWNLOADING_IMAGE`, `PROGRESS_BOOTING`, `PROGRESS_RUNNING_TEST`, etc in our BZA client." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "nit: `

    ` after the line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should we include the files with otf extension here, too? If not, I wonder why we do allow them in the source but we don't include them as per the setup" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "i think it's OK to leave this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to change in the future.", + "reference": "Does this need to be public? The only reference to `FlinkTypeVisitor` that I see in this PR is here, so I'm not sure why this is needed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "No line at end of file warning" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "This looks unused, shouldn't it point to inner processor in any way?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "There may be a few isolated cases where the FirstN node is added during preCodeGen. Please see GenPreCode.cpp RelRoot::preCodeGen(). The example given there about Order by where sort is added in optimizer, or a FirstN where the N value is to be specified with a param seem to be cases where we would add the FirstN later. Will current change cause such views to marked as updateable? This is minor and could be resolved later, if any change is necessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think you should compose the %sClient part using the Name class, and then do the remaining composition with plain concatenation. Side question: why does the return type name look like it is a client type name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "All stories in this file also need the default padding." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Curious - what would be the actual value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `train_detector` function.", + "reference": "Is it necessary to record the palette in the checkpoint? Any reason?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Not sure how to best do this without creating a new connection to the server everytime. Do this in another thread?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to test this.", + "reference": "should we have a similar test for gsa18f procurements?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "change `v.recipient` to address.Address, so can use `AccountState(v,recipient)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `approval_notice` method in the `approval_notice` class.", + "reference": "Open to doing away with this altogether and maybe injecting this logic somehow into `requires_approval_notice?` in LinearDispatcher." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to create a new config and set it to true and set it to true if it'''''' set to true.", + "reference": "remove this and always enable tracer, just set the default timeout to something higher (20 seconds)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Can we move this to ` ScriptDTO`?", + "reference": "Can we give this field a more descriptive name? When I use a variable named `icon` I normally expect an `Image` object." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a separate command. I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "can't these just use the global `include` and `exclude` flags?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Is this still necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Interesting! Happen to catch an exception message or anything I can look into?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "did this get moved to mpromise? I don't recall if it's in that lib or not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `Ports []int`", + "reference": "json objects should be `camelCase`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ```", + "reference": "QuarterGiBSectorSize? SectorSize265MiB? Spelling out 256 seems overly verbose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a bug, but I'm not sure if it's a bug or if it's a bug, or if it's a bug, I'm not sure if it's a bug or if it's a bug.", + "reference": "Maybe with this change we can remove `using OpenTelemetry.Logs`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Fix this name too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `int(record_get_field_value(self.record, \"001\"))`", + "reference": "why this is an issue?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The condition should be inverse?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "this seems to be a property key name, so should it be a inside configurationkey.java?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "G204: Subprocess launching should be audited (from `gosec`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please add docs here. And also warn users that this mode should be avoided whenever possible, because any blocking IO will make the keep-alive-thread not run." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "We shouldn't require dimension values to be a string. They just need to be scalar values (probably we could check whether it's either a string or a number). Something more important to cover in the validation here though is to ensure that a map of `dimensionName => dimensionValue` is passed. The keys here actually need to be strings. For example someone shouldn't be able to pass an array of values." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "let's do a pointer cast of nil, similar to the `MapRouter` above" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the action. I don't think we should add this to the action, but I don't think we should add this to the action.", + "reference": "action should use a prefix of `hfg` rather than `neve` as we plan to bootstrap this as a standalone library. Moreover, previously filter/actions used in this library was using the same pattern." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "I'm halfway tempted to disable this for all https connections. Do you know of any clients that actually renegotiate for any reason?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "shouldn't **call** return a boolean?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I don't think you need the blank import here. This one uses awsdynamodb directly." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I think this should be initialized to `null` instead of a predicate. There is no need to run an extra predicate (with an extra method dispatch for each row in a data file. That's a tight loop so we should do more work here to avoid it. Instead of using `isDeleted.or`, this should test whether `isDeleted` is `null` and either initialize `isDeleted` or call `isDeleted.or`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if it is a good idea.", + "reference": "What is this and the next entry in config_handler used for?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "will your editor integrate `gofmt`, `goimports`, etc...?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "looks like the code is not properly formatted. for example here are some missing spaces in **if** command. please take care and reformat the code using default android formatting." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "Please add some valid examples to help message like `\"4:10\"`, `\"4:\"`, `\":10\"`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "Is it only Symbols we're worried about converting? Is it not safe to just call `to_s` anyway?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to be a constant. I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "Note for those who come across this later: It was moved to `testhelpers.mining.go` so that `testhelpers.NewDaemon` and the `mining/worker_test.go` can share it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "What about `sort_by(&:in_progress?)`? Maybe with a `.reverse` thrown in?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Flag is removed because it is only gRPC now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Might be better to rephrase to: Please refer to the ``init scenario`` command in order to generate a custom ``molecule`` scenario. Since you aren't customizing the default scenario since it already exists, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Shall we merge these `if` for `path lib` and then do the `attrname` one. I'm trying to count `if`-calls and its getting late but I think we can reduce the number checks needed to get into L648 from 3 to 2 if you understand what I mean" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "why depend on recovery???" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to close the done channel.", + "reference": "the done channel only aims to be closed, so `chan struct{}` is better then `chan interface{}`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Do you mean to have gas_oracle changes in this PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Is this effectively requiring browsers support javascript?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `", + "reference": "Lowercase `boolean` - use the primitive type." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this check into the `CheckIfBlobExists` method so that we don't have to check for blobExists.", + "reference": "This isn't the correct logic. if allowOverride == true and!blobExists then upload. Just don't do the exist check if allowOverride is set to true." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Can you replace these by `else if` please?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Would be nice if the field had a unique class name that could be used to target it, instead of `fromRange` But doesn't seem to be a common thing in the code base." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Does this code fit on one line under 80 characters? It would be more consistent with our existing style." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Not a requirement here. But i see a change in naming convention. We can rename the function to `CstorSparsePoolArtifactsFor070`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why do you configure the UART like this? It's already configured by default." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Wow. Good catch. \"This `#include` was brought to you by the department of redundancy department.\" ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Well it's actually calling `AuthorizeOrder` and this seems like a DebugLevel message to me, maybe it should be dropped entirely." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Should this be using the `CUDA_SAFE_CALL` macro here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "What cases do you see as being valid for not having any tests to run? If a test project doesn't have any tests to run we should avoid running it at the project level." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror", + "reference": "and is it possible that mset.mirror.msgs be nil? because if so, then you would get a panic also because of that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `pixman_region32_copy(&state->opaque, &next->opaque);`", + "reference": "`next->opaque` should not be cleared." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "already what? I know what, but seems like smth. is missing in this sentence" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you put spaces after the `{`and before the `}`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We said we would put `[ ]` around the version. `[forseti-security] [v2.3.0]`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Seems len(cnb[0]) will be the length after the write since of the *v thing we saw no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "can we make use of storagepoolclaim type rather than the generic interface{} type?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "this should happen before the `go k.manage()`, otherwise the node will always try the bootnodes first" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Is this actually a lint related change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the migration file.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "what does this do that str_param does not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "For GCP we included the API name (see below) so you can distinguish between uses other than `blob` once they exist, WDYT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import boto3 here.", + "reference": "what would you think about doing this include on-demand within S3ObjectStore methods and then failing in a loud way?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "May be better make `stopped` atomic, then it can be just `for (auto i (node.store.latest_begin (transaction_a, next_frontier_account)), n (node.store.latest_end ()); i!= n && &&!stopped && elections_count < max_elections; ++i)`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())((((((((((------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "In `src/storage/InternalStorageServiceHandler.h ` file, the client in `client->future_chainAddEdges ` should be InterStorageServiceAsyncClient?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `prometheus-operator/pkg/apis/monitoring/v1` file.", + "reference": "`go.sum` needs to be updated for this. Please run `go mod tidy`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Not sure if this was discussed previously, but is there a specific use case in mind for having this as an API field rather than a configuration option on the controller manager? Is there a specific use case in mind where one would want to choose different backends for individual Clusters/Machines vs having it a global configuration for an instance of the infrastructure provider?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Same thing with the OtlpExporter" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Should not be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Not a blocker for anything, but should this be moved to beaker-pe? Is that ticketed anywhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "this shouldn't be beforeClickOn, but rather beforeSubmit? and added to WebDriverEventListener. Since submit does not synthesize the 'click' events, this isn't accurate." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "this ternary operator is hiding an `if/else` within an `if/else` - any chance we could move the logic ELSEwhere? (see what I did there --?? :100: )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this interface should be deprecated.", + "reference": "Is this really internal? Or will the API be different in PMD 7.0.0? Well, the interface doesn't offer much functionality anyway..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Does it have to be arrays? Isn't it ragged 'data' (i.e multiple elements of different lengths)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Per my understanding, this flag only impacts \"NoCleanup\" disk. If so, we may name it more clear. The reason of this ask is because I plan to add some other flag to force cleanup for other non-NoCleanup disks." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "In my changes for `RequiresDistributionAndOrdering`, this class went away and is replaced by an inner class. I think that pattern worked well. Maybe we could do that before this one to reduce the number of changes here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this be called `hp` instead of `life`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this filter.", + "reference": "Because the default value of allowedOrigins is * (all origins), so it isn't necessary to set again at all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Undo this modification" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Please check my thoughts here... I changed the test to not `ToString()` attribute values. This was important to test things when `net.peer.port` was both an int or a string, but I was unsure if Zipkin supported non-string attributes." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Looks like you made changes on `CameraResultType` class, but didn't commit them. And you also have to do the changes on the types in @capacitor/core" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you explain the history of the bug a bit, and why this fixes it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `MentorHelper` class.", + "reference": "What do you think about `mentor_mail_to` or `mentor_mail_to_link` in order to match Rails' `mail_to` method, which is what this calls? I'm not sure about this suggestion..." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Looks like this will make the check in every loop. Consider extracting the null check." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Maybe `it \"can safely be reset when there are not yet any shared example groups\"`? That's the edge case that wasn't working, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "naming: please use `asmfactory`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "FYI you could use a raw string for this which removes the need for escaping the inner quotes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "2 blank lines here (between functions)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Nit: we try to avoid whitespace changes because they can easily cause unnecessary commit conflicts." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `$file_contents = substr($file_contents, $end_pos, 2) === '::')`", + "reference": "As mentioned below, I'm not sure why this is only allowing refs that are tagged with `*` at the start!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Don't forget the {} symbols, and please use EqualsBuilder and HashcodeBuilder as possible" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Allocate buffer once outside loop." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "It would be better to check that system.nodes[1]->network.port is somewhere in the target without specifying its exact position. But it is a very minor point and I have no string opinion on it just thought I'd mention it because our tests in general have too implementation detail." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Should this be in a bundle?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "When Activity is lost (more precisely, ExecutionContext is lost) in the HttpModule we restore the root (HttpIn) Activity. That makes this assert invalid. I tried to fix the HttpModule so that it restores the Activity that was last running, but it is impossible to retrieve do to the way ExecutionContext works. It isn't an issue to remove the assert, but it is unnerving. Any instrumentation running in IIS reliant on Activity.Current could run into trouble." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "what was the point in moving handlers registration into a separate method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "At this point we probably want to ensure there's a store command set." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This code is way too complicated for what it does. I don't want to be a PITA, but what can you consider rewriting it in a simpler way? I'm talking about the whole `_getDerivationIndexes` function" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be in hex.", + "reference": "Don't throw base exception, specify more precise type" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function. I don't think it should be a function.", + "reference": "Recursive -> Recursively converted -> convert" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean value, not a boolean value.", + "reference": "why is this object API only? I think the reason why we didn't do this before was because this code was shared with Java which doesn't have value structs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "just to confirm, so backend will deal with both old format and new format?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "huh, look at that, I wasn't aware you could constrain a type by Enum" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Even though the debug parameter is effectively ignored, should this default to `false` instead of `true`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "What is the purpose of this interface? Unlike ParamDocView, it doesn't seem to be used anywhere to enable polymorphism" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We added a library to generate a UUID for the request_id directive \"github.com/nu7hatch/gouuid\" can we uses the same one for what you want rather than add another dependency? Or if the google one is better can we remove the nu7hatch library?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this be `i * Interval`? You're multiplying nanos with a Duration, I'm not sure what's the result :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((/////", + "reference": "I guess it's not no-access to match Windows where guard pages are readable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Not a blocker, but would probably be useful to have a `scope :non_pending_approvers` on the `Proposal` model." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to have a `task_id` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status` and a `task_status`.", + "reference": "Add trailing comma" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I see someone say SIGKILL can not be caught by process. The original code here about `SIGKILL` is useless?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "As it is a mobile only theme, please make sure the option appears only on mobile" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea to have a `parse_param_list` method.", + "reference": "Would like a docstring and type annotations here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore. I think it would be better to have a `self.shard_key_fields = []` here.", + "reference": "This is an API change. Why was it made?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Please move using inside namespace." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "shall we create some enum flags for setasmain shouldprocess and pos?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should this `PUPPET_AGENT_STARTUP_MODE` have a corresponding yardoc change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Why not simply remove the `pytest` import now that it's not needed anymore? :wink:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Yeah, not filled in yet." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a label here.", + "reference": "don't use style. Use a class instead. reducing `col-xs-12` down to 8 or 6 or whatever should do the trick" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "should we also do `reloadCache` when database is null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why not just return QueryMol directly? Why require the copy?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Could you add a docstring?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "looks like you added newlines after blocks in a few files - I generally like newlines before/after multi-line blocks _except_ when the end the block is directly nested inside another block (eg: two `end`s next to each other) what do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "@jlerbsc's fix in #2918 in action - thanks! :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "nitpick: Please lower-case `Zero_count` (as it's a literal argument name) and `Argument` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "change the name of the function to match its functionality? account IsIssuing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "for later: add docstring (can just copy paste Pandas')" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "nit: @sonofachamp pointed out to me that the idiomatic way is \"archermocks\" (lowercase for package names)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `router not set`", + "reference": "Ugh I'm stupid, can you change this to `yarpc.InternalErrorf`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We instantiate some metadata tables in tests so I kept the old constructor too. Won't harm if someone is using it directly too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "I think the better place to put this might be `lib/options/PopulateOptions.js`. That should make it easier - checking options in `populate()` can get confusing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Lets have simple function arguments here, because now struct `traversal.Params` started to have 2 purposes: 1. used as contract in DTO between consumer-provider 2. as function parameters for internal code calls" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this test into the `RemoteDistributorTest` class.", + "reference": "Probably best not to have an empty test...." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`image_tag` in the `testimonials` files?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `json.getBytes(\"UTF-8\")`", + "reference": "I believe flow.toObject() method is throwing NPE if SLA option list (i.e. this.executionOptions.getSlaOptions()) is null or one of the value in the list (i.e. this.executionOptions.getSlaOptions()) is null. If that is the case we could fix root cause of NPE in the ExecutableFlow.toObject() method. The corresponding code to populate SLA options can be modified as follows. final List> slaOptions = Optional.ofNullable(this.executionOptions.getSlaOptions()).orElse(Collections.emptyList()).stream().filter(Objects::nonNull).map(slaOption -> slaOption.toObject()).collect(Collectors.toList());" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "So I haven't tested this - but since the icon location is just directly dumped into the img _src_ attribute, won't this cause issues with Ghost blogs in a subdirectory? If I'm misunderstanding what the purpose of the default is then let me know" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Why swallow the exception here rather than propagate it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be None.", + "reference": "How about `column_index_names`? `column_names` sounds ambiguous." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should rename this to METRICS_MODE_COLUMN_CONF_PREFIX.", + "reference": "+1 on this. Do we want to have it as `WRITE_METRICS_MODE_COLUMN_CONF_PREFIX` to be consistent with defaults? Is there a possibility we will have `READ_METRICS_MODE_COLUMN_CONF_PREFIX`? Not sure." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the test.", + "reference": "Shall we use different inputs for `PySpark < 2.4` where `transpose` won't work with different data types." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "we should sort the headers like in spark: public packages, then pyspark, then internal" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "looks like we should drop this var from the transport options struct" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "Ah, yeah, this is the test for the validation that I mentioned in a remark above about relaxing the validation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a tuple, but I don't think it should be a tuple.", + "reference": "For tensors, it is better to illustrate the shape." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.", + "reference": "This was removed in a recent PR for the admin bar, but should have been kept. It's been restored in the other admin bar PR but I've added it here to for completeness." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate test.", + "reference": "nit: probably swap the if condition and `if/else` and check `NETCOREAPP2_1` which looks more natural." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "for the tag, should it be `requestor_rtt` since the other is `responder_rtt`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `MutateByte(a*1), n`", + "reference": "The one sad part of this is that is will generate a lot of overhead if you loop through a vector, since it obtains the vector every time. But with the current API there is no alternative I guess, and it is better to have the option than not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: there should be a newline between `types` and `go-ipfs-files`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "would be nice to have this as a parameter (Options), re: technical debt discussions" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################A######################A########################", + "reference": "complete ignorance here but is it ok to import this from `com.sun`? can it break under non-oracle JREs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this some way of saying that the span is going to be sampled? I'm basing this question on the condition I saw for the `OnEnd` to be called - `mustExport := s.spanContext.IsSampled() && )`. Shouldn't the condition be `s.spanContext.IsSampled()` to match the condition for calling the `OnEnd`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log this error.", + "reference": "just calling UpdateSnapshotInfo() should be fine" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Was `DefaultLogMessageRateLimit` not configurable anywhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate test.", + "reference": "Please use the `assert` instead. Same below." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Owww, I think I found a typo. `suche`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This can happen because we could get `PhantomNodes` that are not admissible as source/target right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should we add a note here to file a bug if this ever happens?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "overflow is still possible, isn't it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This seems more like a personal preference, so maybe this should be in your `~/.rspec`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "To avoid a circular import between pcapdnet and automaton" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please remove this blank line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "it feels that the WorkloadIdentityCondition should be added to this Status... And if you have workload identity enabled, but not working, then you can mark that condition failed, and also Mark the ready false... not entirely sure though" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think these got refactored to `LvlFindInChain` to better conform with the coding guidelines. I think MarkL left these in for backwards compatibility." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "It's fine for this PR, but in the future try to minimize unrelated changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "The library -> modules and filters -> filter path changes are breaking changes or?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import boto3 here.", + "reference": "Can we encapsulate this check (`os.environ.get(\"TEST_TARGET\") == \"AWS_CLOUD\"`) into a small config/util function? (and also use it in `integration/conftest.py`) (I'd generally try to avoid accessing `os.environ` directly across the codebase. I'm aware that we're already doing this in a few places, but maybe we can start pulling things out - this will also help us create more systematic config/environment abstractions as we go...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "An `if` statement would be better here. Functions, concat and reverse are all very expensive." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`Log here: connect to default factory for goerli network

    `" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "nits, should add `break` to avoid redundant iterations." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I think we want an exception here, there should never be a transfer to a nonexisting account." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to log the container id?", + "reference": "This code is new and not tested well. While we may drop the log level before we ship 4.0, right now this is extremely helpful to users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Can we make these asserts more strict/precise? I remember this test helped to spot the issue of inconsistent results on different platforms due to using `sort` instead of `stable_sort`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I thought about adjusting for case here as well? For example `.rb,rb,.RB,.rb` would all map to ruby interpreter specified? Is that too much \"magic\"? Is there a sane workflow that someone would choose to map `.rb` to one interpreter and `.RB` to another?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a bug?", + "reference": "In this and the one below, should we assert `self!= NULL` first?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Why this is needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "we already have.meta() so I don't think we want get_meta() for PackageEntry" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `dagRequest` class.", + "reference": "question: can we always get the startts from dagrequest?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Nit-picking, but this can be simplified to reference `properties[ 0 ]` since that is already retrieved 2 lines above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to delete the target.", + "reference": "This technically works because we call `get_targets` before we remove the target, so it's bound to have been resolved. But I'm not sure I would like to rely on that assumption. Should we also remove it from `@unresolved_targets` to be safe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "So what happens if I try to get code on a EOA?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can't we return an empty list and then just compare the lengths? Thereby removing this `if`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Mb change it to 'doesPassRestrictions()'? Doesn't sound enough like a boolean-returning method to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "TODO: in fact At when used with noncurrent time should not return a next index. only latest should.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "There are scenario's where we skip an update with a placeholder, in this case tmp returns null with render, this is not an array so we `[null]` it" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( code code code code code code code", + "reference": "@danieldietrich, this wasn't tested so I presumed it wasn't working before either :p" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Please leave two empty lines after the `use` statement" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import this file. I think it should be in `pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/k/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/k/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/k/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/kubernetes/pkg/kubernetes/kubernetes/k", + "reference": "Please move this import in the 3rd group which is for external dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "So what exactly is this fixing? The unit test is passing with or without this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "auto targetFile = fs::FileUtils::joinPath(newPath, folly::stringPrintf(\"%019ld.wal\", it->first));" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this method is a good idea. I don't think this method is a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't see any place that checks whether the from snapshot is an ancestor of the to snapshot. That seems like a requirement for this to work correctly to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Other calls to getHelpText() are wrapped in an `isset()` check. Would it make sense to be consistent, and either restore that here or remove it elsewhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Why the change? If `output_stream` is set to something non-nil, it seems odd (and potentially wrong) to overwrite it...." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]<", + "reference": "Thinking this should have an underscore." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "To accommodate the change to the method being private." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this rule to the `HttpVerbValidation` class.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we traverse all definitions and apply this rule over all model definitions in the doc" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please rename this class that it ends with the suffix \"Test\" - otherwise the tests won't be executed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do anything with it. I don't think we need to do anything with it, but I don't think we need to do anything with it.", + "reference": "As a JS file, this should also receive our standard file header." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))))((((((set)))))))((((((((((((set))))))))(((((((((set))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "I take it memQuotaRatio is an \"out\" parameter at line 1810? Also, why use MIN_QUOTA in both the cases of memQuota being too low and too high? Contrast this code with RelRoot::codeGen where we set MIN_QUOTA only in the too low case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "It looks like for newpullsubscription, we have two functions. One for pullsubscription with default, one for pullsubscription without default. If you remove setdefault here, then there is no differences between these two functions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "not dramatic, but why 32bits if we allow a range that is smaller than 8?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to have a `BenefiterId` field.", + "reference": "- Use type from `service_discovery/dto/price.go` - Rename `Price` -> `Money`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "one space missing at the beginning" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I worry that having `Platform` as `string` instead of `*string` would result in it getting overriden with `\"\"` if the environment manifest config doesn't specify `platform`. If it gets overridden as `\"\"`, that could be a problem for users that are not using `linux/amd64` right? If this indeed is a potential impact, could we double check in `ApplyEnv`'s unit test? Same with the `Platform` in `TaskConfig`. Sorry for not seeing this in my previous review!!!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I like the new directory `/api`, what is the thinking behind `/external`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "staticcheck flags this: replace with `for k :=..`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "There's already a sleep right above" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `assertion` block, so that we don't have to change the `assertion` block.", + "reference": "This feels hacky, is there a better way?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can we move this logic into the `boto.compat` module? Then it's just `from boto.compat import OrderedDict` instead. Also, this is introducing a new dependency. What about users on 2.6.x that don't have the OrderedDict module installed? We may need to fall back to an ordinary `dict` so that existing code in the wild does not break." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "\"Gets the JSON serialization settings.\" would be better?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "The endpoint should be in plural `/files`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "??? Why do we need to have a different API in Python? Oh, wait, I see what you did. It's to fake the namespaces. Given that I don't think the namespaces are necessary, and that less of these should be exposed anyway, I think these should go." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I think this line is gofmt issue? @daixiang0" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "probably better to assert the values directly; technically you could pass this test with an implementation that always returned \"\" for the subrepo for example." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "line is 161 characters (from `lll`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new line.", + "reference": "Are these changes needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "It seems like reducing the sensitivity would make the test failure less likely to occur, but not fix the issue?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "missing use statement for importing the full namespace" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.", + "reference": "Generally error messages in Go shouldn't start with capital letter. I see this rule is broken in many places here. Why?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "These test checks if selection coordinates don't return negative values in that edge cases. Please revert the changes and set `autoWrapCol` and `autoWrapRow` to `false` to the Handsontable instance. This change applies to the entire Core_selection.spec.js file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I would prefer flag SkipGasPricingValidation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "could be `const &`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `Dashboard` class.", + "reference": "The docs should also be updated with the new option." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should use boto.sns.connect_to_region(config.get('sns','region', 'us-east-1'))", + "reference": "Name is _way_ to generic for this patch to be accepted I think. Can you rename it to maybe `send_sns_notification` or something else you find suitable?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Out of the scope." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I think we need an if block to check that if this API is really missing. We wouldn't want to override the browser's implementation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I was wondering, things like EDITOR_TYPE, VALIDATOR_TYPE, RENDERER_TYPE are not obligatory. Therefore if the custom editor will be registered with this method, `name` will be set to `undefined`. Should we handle this scenario?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "This line should not be removed, as it is not the description of the package, but a copyright header." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a string.", + "reference": "Wouldn't it be more space efficient to make this a `byte` enum or bitfield?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Flake8 doesn't like the assignment, but non-use of `e` here. I think we can just remove the try/except here for `cursor.execute(sql)`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe add short example list:.... type body declarations, such as AnnotationMembers, Methods, Fields" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `TIMEOUTS` or `TIMEOUTS`?", + "reference": "These are really meant to be the keys in the capabilities, not the keys of values within the capabilities" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It is debatable whether we have to default this. I did this to avoid breaking custom implementations." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "# `attr_value['string'] is not None` probably not required as `attr_value['string'] == value` check is already being done" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `awscloudformation`", + "reference": "we shouldn't need the \"addon\" rename" + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to add the `must_be_admin` to the `Admin::DecksController` class?", + "reference": "These are covered by routing constraints." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Could we use just a normal string here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`isFunction(Symbol)` triggers a `ReferenceError` if Symbol is undefined. Using `typeof Symbol === 'function'` is OK however." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Is there an else clause (with a lock.unlock ()) missing here as well? If we think we do not need an else clause then lets add an else clause containing assert zero." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "do we foresee `32` ever changing? (as well as its use in error checking in `clerk.go`) if \"no\" this is fine, if \"yes\" it's probably still fine" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "you don't need to create a enum for this, java allows you to switch on a string ;) (since java 7?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to load the roles into ember cache. I think we need to load the roles into ember cache.", + "reference": "This should be `modelPromises.roles = this.get('store').query('role',...` and the promise body should just `return roles;`. This is because the `model()` hook will pause for the returned promises to be resolved before continuing so when returning `RSVP.hash` you end up with a hash containing the values returned from the promises so the controller and everything else relying on the `model` object doesn't need to worry about things being async." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "This is basically a repeat of `main-is-top-level.js`. I suggest having these 3 checks point to the same evaluate file. You can change what element they test through the rule selector as well as the check.json options property. So you would have `main-is-top-level.json`, `banner-is-top-level.json` and `contentinfo-is-top-level.json` each point to `landmark-is-top-level.js`, and pass in a different `options` object which tells it what element you're trying to test." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Why do we need this check? setCore already handles nulls." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "good catch, thanks. This is going to make the user experience much better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "TODO: remove this unused import" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message.", + "reference": "Hmm leaking the library name out in the Workload API doesn't seem great. Do we want to catch these errors and return a canned \"could not parse token\" or something instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think `-f gradlew` is better for code unity" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Is there precedent for this config key? What other keys are similar? The others in this file start with `table.exec.iceberg`. Is there a reason for not continuing with that convention?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((!!))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Can we avoid no-change changes being committed - they make it harder to distinguish actual changes from code editor changes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name of the server certificate. I don't think we should change the name of the server certificate. I don't think we should change the name of the server certificate. I don't think we should change the name of the server certificate. I don't think we should change the name of the server certificate.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to parseAccessPolicyFlag here.", + "reference": "You dont use this dependency anymore" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.", + "reference": "Here is the test that checks that the sqlcipher in use was compiled with the right flags" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(false))))(false))))))))))))((()))))(((()))", + "reference": "Turns out that if the hosts are not in an `array`, an `Exception` is not thrown anymore :-( It simply returns `null`. So, we need to attempt to parse a `string` outside the `catch` block for it to work." + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new line.", + "reference": "this test only covers the happy path. what about no acceptable rest template found?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.", + "reference": "Since this is in a test, I imagine that the choice of `info` level was deliberate." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "this should probably be named somewhere if you want to reuse it." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable? I'm not sure how to do that.", + "reference": "needs a rename to not include AWS" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Isn't sigma have `double` type?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "May be better use nano::keypair that generates ramdom value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i", + "reference": "I think the more complete solution will save off a `ignoreUndefined` in the base class for the bulk operation (with a default of `false`), and use that for calculations. Was there a reason you didn't want to support the option from the operation level?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "The catch (Exception e) block that follows does an updateSync, which will get a SmartStore instance (while logging out is taking place) - and then terrible things will happen - a database gets created for the outgoing user that won't be openable by the returning user causing the app to crash at logout. This is a somewhat superficial fix - SmartStore should not return an instance for an outgoing user." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the test.", + "reference": "huh does this work without a `Return`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Don't think we want this line, right? (Plus \"failing\" is spelled wrong)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should move this to the `FeedItemMenuHandler` class.", + "reference": "I think it would be more clear to have local-feed-hiding all in one place (bottom of this method?). Further up the method, there already is some code that hides the website icon, for example." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why remove this one? It doesn't work yet, but we'll add it sooner or later." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why did you remove the struct tags?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this work?", + "reference": "Let's be neutral with tag names. Let's just have \"ReportURL\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Use an explicit time to ensure conversion is not copy-paste and wrong." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "The logic now is to look for ``. This `` output is also not consistent with the other two functions you mentioned. Do the other two RPCs not report an error?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Use nested module/class definitions instead of compact style." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.", + "reference": "Do you think we need to keep this in, or is it just leftover personal debugging? Seems like it wouldn't be too useful most of the time, but I don't care too much if you want to keep it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this if config.showPlayers() | config.Veng() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showPlayers() | config.showNpcs() | config.Veng() | config.Veng() | config.TB() | config.TB() | config.Veng() | config.TB() | config.Veng() | config.Veng() | config.TB() | config", + "reference": "showNPCs is not needed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Docstring for public function pls" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "This should use `t.Errorf` instead. You want the second part of the test to run even when the first part fails." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `if (ctx.protocol_selector.ratio.http3 > 0) {`", + "reference": "Should this if block better be changed to `#if H2O_USE_LIBUV \\n #else... #endif`? The reason I wonder is because that's the way the QUIC context is being initilaized at the beginning of this function. Though I would not expect practical difference between the two approaches, because ATM the only case where we create QUIC connections is when the protocol selector is set to non-zero, and because when it is set to non-zero `h2o_quiy_close_all_connections` becomes a no-op." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `useReducer` function. I think we should move this into the `useReducer` function. I think it would be better to move this into the `useReducer` function.", + "reference": "`Object.is` is an ES6 feature of JS so I don't think we can use it here (or we have to change our browser support matrix or specify that an Object.is polyfill is pre-req of `preact/hooks`). Should we just do an `===` check in `preact/hooks` and provide a `Object.is` polyfill and version of `useReducer` in `preact/compat`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This was a bug I picked up by using the TS interface as a guide, this seems like it was / is the intention, also is a bug in master (needs port)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `WITH_COLLECTION` instead of `WITH_COLLECTION`.", + "reference": "It would be helpful to explicit here what this really means and assumes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`ExpectedBalances` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "This is another place where I'd feel more comfortable with declaring the class private. We can always make it public in the future if someone makes a case for that, but I prefer to err on the side of privateness for things like this that 99% of RSpec users won't have a reason to use." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Feels like this should be left as is and add a new createClientWithIssuers or something like that. Avoid all the \"\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error handler.", + "reference": "Minor unrelated bug in the IDP flow where the error wasn't getting displayed as a `Toast`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?", + "reference": "I thought we got rid of this thing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please convert int params as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Fixed bug in implementation. Now I can run the validator from the VS Tools menu, double-click on an output line, and navigate to the site of the issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error message.", + "reference": "Can we rename this field to `HttpServerErrorCodes` or `HttpServerErrorStatuses`? It will contain a list of status _codes_, not a list of _errors_. (Personally I prefer \"codes\" over \"statuses\", but we can't change `DD_HTTP_SERVER_ERROR_CODES`.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "would you please use: flb_utils_bool(...) here?, that function wraps the on/off/true/false stuff." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to pass the prerelease here. I don't think we need to pass the prerelease here.", + "reference": "`invocationInfoTokensToRedact: null` (I really like the convention of using a named parameter whenever the value doesn't communicate the meaning, such as for literal values.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "maybe renamed to `async_simple_test` if we consider supporting aug test later on?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to do this in the `initialize` method?", + "reference": "So where is default_attributes now? Is it used anywhere else still? If not, can it be removed along with any tests of it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We could move this to the base class and remove all these changes. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "While we're doing some translation work, could you extract this button text and the other static text from the view?" + }, + { + "prediction": "how to do this?", + "reference": "Nit: Please fix indentation (note: Azkaban uses 2 spaces and not tabs)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `new Realm({schemaVersion: 1, schema: []})`", + "reference": "This change is necessary because the schema version is ignored unless a schema is specified. I think that has always been the intent." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "The api/docs/release.dox changelog message is missing: maybe you planned to add it once NtAllocateVirtualMemoryEx and NtMapViewOfSectionEx support is in? I would say, add it here in the same diff that raises max_supported_os_version." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `return true;`", + "reference": "Just do: `return node.hasAttribute('aria-hidden')`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Do we need `_processDataPoisoned`? Can the name or the id of the current process ever change? Or the machine name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to set this to true?", + "reference": "Did it not work out to wait until after containerd and kubelet are started?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "variable names suggestions from me: - damageboost, ITEM_PARSE_DAMAGEBOOST, \"damage boost +x%\" - healingboost, ITEM_PARSE_HEALINGBOOST, \"healing power +y%\" - managainboost, ITEM_PARSE_MANAGAINBOOST, \"mana restoration +z%\" alternatively the other names can stay, because \"increase\" convention isn't that bad, just change mana values to: - \"increasemanarestored\", ITEM_PARSE_INCREASEMANARESTORED, \"mana restoration +z%\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `has_all_data` field.", + "reference": "Why can't this be determined by 'PARTIAL_SUCCESS' in the `status` field?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Does it make sense to generate a Exception here? Maybe yes, because it wouldn't make sense to generate a path without the id of the media right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This should be made private." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "perhaps this is better modeled as a pkg-level var?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "I don't think there is a maximum scale, neither for Hive nor for Trafodion. The only condition right now is that the scale can't exceed the precision. Example of a valid scale: DECIMAL(18,18). The maximum of 6 digits applies only to TIMESTAMP columns, where we don't support resolution below microseconds." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in UpdateProjectStaticUser" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why is this not the default, and why only for JS?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `project_id` model.", + "reference": "A repository has many badges so we should also add type column in scope." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Now a hash set, so can't index into it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "@jpogran Does this seem like a reasonable way to know if we're in powershell vs. CMD or *sh?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should consider body encoding.", + "reference": "1.toLowerCase(Locale.US)? 2.where is accept bug fix?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We should still be providing something to the user in the case of a `KeyError` instead of a stack trace!?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error error error error", + "reference": "check Lukasz's fix with NonceReserving - is that not better?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Would you explain why here please? E.g. from the PR description > the renderer expects to be able to use the secondary color as the fill for a shadow." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Lock needs to go to `RecoverFromDb` instead. Here it may cause deadlocks. My convention was that un-exported functions do not lock, only exported ones (with name starting with a capital letter)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "German keyboard would also be used in Austria and Switzerland, so this should have included `.at` and `.ch`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "since this makes the indexer thing really only used for a single table, now, you can put in a TODO for me to cleanup and simplify this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to \"nscd-socket\" instead of \"nscd-socket\"", + "reference": "Should we have this path passed from the Azkaban properties? If this is the standard path for nscd even outside LinkedIn, then we can keep it." + }, + { + "prediction": "We should not rely on the stream name, such as AllowNoSubject. So need to revisit this.", + "reference": "Could be a non-public field. `allowNoSubject`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Don't think this is quite right - think the build one also needs an `IsOriginalTarget` (c.f. code in `src/build`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `processResults` method. I think we should add it to the `processResults` method.", + "reference": "what about adding typehints instead? I don't think we need to add docblocks for every private methods." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Is it fine to pass the \"-o compression=on\" in the middle instead of at the end?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Probably make them all keyword arguments." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Why not just check the backdrop setting here as well for the time being? We can combine the code later but at least then it would be configurable if people like the backgrounds." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "why are we turning this one into a Warning?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Wouldn't it be better to use double quotes for the opening parenthesis?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Remove the cast" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this file.", + "reference": "What criteria do we use to bump the copyright years? An update to the module?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "should we rm line 269?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `_onNvdaStartupComplete` method.", + "reference": "Perhaps the code at `source/core.py:564: postNvdaStartup.notify()` should be queued instead? If we are saying the loop must have started before NVDA's startup is complete, then the `postNvdaStartup` action is incorrect." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `cart_with_approvals_and_items` method.", + "reference": "Needed this for testing locally with mail view but not used for any tests. Might be nice to have some seed scripts at some point." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "wait, if we only do this for successful status codes won't we miss a whole slew of responses? We should be checking this for all codes right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Adding in the service yaml `library.yaml` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why is this dereference needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Might want to add that this only happens if you have write permissions to the folder." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `Retryable` field. I don't think we should have a `Retryable` field.", + "reference": "Adding a small blurb about why someone would want to enable this flag would help clarify what it is for. Such as something about when providing a custom retry handler and how`ShouldRetry` will be handled with and without the flag enabled." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "assume the user will be able to register for a custom service name in future?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "The extra two empty lines seem unnecessary. Please review your diffs more carefully." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the API to use the old API.", + "reference": "What the reason to embed the Oracle?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but I'm not sure if it's the best way to go about it. I'm not sure if it's the best way to go about it, but I'm not sure if it's the best way to go about it. If it's the best way to go about it, I'm not sure if it's the best way to go about it. If it's the best way to go about it, I'm not sure if it's the best way to go about it. If it's the best way to go about it, I think it's better to move it into the `pages/new-topics` route.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this happen automatically with High Voltage?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This is changed because we need `projectId` to be printed as `$projectId` in PHP." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "This title change seems more accurate to me however not sure if this will confuse users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid regex, but I don't think it's a valid regex.", + "reference": "Here (and on line 158 as well), would it be more efficient to use the String end_with() method? Not tested" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why are you creating a new (second) `RAMHandler` here? Is this just an oversight from deleting the previous code?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this code into the `CreateEdgeIndexProcessor` class. I don't think we should move this code into the `CreateEdgeIndexProcessor` class. I think we should move the code into the `CreateEdgeIndexProcessor` class. I think we should move the code into the `CreateEdgeIndexProcessor` class.", + "reference": "Move the line 27 to line 31 is better?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "In slack I mentioned we should only do this if the update is from some other device, to make sure our own updates don't cause issues. Maybe the revision check above is good enough to prevent this, but I just want to make sure you thought about it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.", + "reference": "I would instead explain that random is the default, but you can switch back to defined, or another ordering scheme." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "Is there a reason you left this at 0?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be null.", + "reference": "The value of `key` will never be `null` at this point, because `getKey()` will generate a value if it is `null`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "NIT: You should first check if AdoNetExcludedTypes.Count is greater than 0 before calling Contains (fast-path)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "should rearrange so as to follow import ordering." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message to say \"Workflow execution state_COMPLETED\"", + "reference": "what is the use case for create workflow with completed state?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this test into the `RemoteDistributorTest` class.", + "reference": "Probably best not to have an empty test...." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Missing the license" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do that.", + "reference": "Looks like this was previously guarded by `EnableCleanupReplicationTask` flag. Now looks like this is always needed. Just want to confirm the intention is if `GlobalNamespace` is enabled then we want run cleanupReplicationTasks in all cases?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Potentially it'll be good to remove all of them excluding \"tbb/tbb.h\" But let's do it next time" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to use `bound_range(vals, density)` instead of `bound_range(vals, density)`.", + "reference": "I would just mention which tolerance - namely as reported by ``sys.float_info``" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": ":+1: Ideally this'll become something you could pass in to the config" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not enough to do this?", + "reference": "Should using `thenValue` to replace `then`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "This follows the convention of each callback starting with the `IsIntegrationEnabled` check." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "this is not required to be part of this PR right? (With UpDownCounter being absent in.NET, we can make this hardcoded for now, i think)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.", + "reference": "Add the PipeFactory here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "please add `var _ impltypes.ChaosImpl = (*Delegate)(nil)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "nit: is this added deliberately?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to stub the request.", + "reference": "Given the number of tests which need this (I think I counted seven) should we maybe just install this one globally? Is there even a place to do that? Something in `test_helper` maybe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "we don't use this anymore, so we can delete it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `initTelemetry` function. I think we should add this to the `initTelemetry` function in the `initTelemetry` function.", + "reference": "nit: change to \"Telemetry configuration loaded from '%s'\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.", + "reference": "Why did this value change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "maybe `duckpubsubv1alpha1`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "The id is not mandatory for web extensions. Could you update this to support a web extension without an id?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I actually prefer them to be defined here. Client who calls `lib` should define the args, not `lib` itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "I think this should've been done with the `defer`-named-return trick. I'll submit a PR for it." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "The bind address should be configurable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Maybe the empty `delete()` should be implemented as default in the interface." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "How to ensure CMAKE_SOURCE_DIR is set correctly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `Balance`", + "reference": "safer to make a copy of incoming *big.Int" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is set to much lower value than LoadImageTimeout.", + "reference": "how did we choose this value? does this hold good for Windows too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "To follow the other build tags, maybe we can call it `criu`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we load this from the config file too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you file an issue for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "@nbbeeken what were the cases where `!!this[kIsMaster]` was yielding an incorrect value? we should try to cover them in the tests" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I think it would be better to just use `Bolt::Inventory.new(inventory['target_hash'])` instead of `Bolt::Inventory.new(inventory['target_hash'])` and use `Bolt::Inventory.new(inventory['target_hash'])`.", + "reference": "This whole function feels messy. I don't have a better idea at the moment though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "should use Number instead of Long" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `MockProvider` here.", + "reference": "Can you rename this and the file `InfluxDBProvider` and `influxdb_provider.go` respectively?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This is the real culprit, as now vlen will always be a Number (and known to the compiler as such). You could probably go one step further and avoid the ToBoolean on `vchildren` as well by writing something like `vlen = (vchildren!== undefined)? vchildren.length : 0` if that matches the contract." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "missing space before `TextView`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "so this attribute is used as u8 in code, but saves as int32? Why?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this to `adaptiveScalarEncoder`", + "reference": "can RDSE be added to the list? It has its capnp files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "These functions only ever read from the API and should always be reading from a cache, so I have made that explicit by expecting a Reader here and supplying a `cache.Cache` as the client." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "No, we can't skip any of the mangling after the suspend point: this should follow the other mangling and undo its push." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "this is generated code.. these changes will need to be made in the code generator to have them stick." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Should we abstract this into a reusable utility so it doesn't have to get repeated in every test file needing Shadow DOM support?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "Maybe we rename this to `command_monitoring.test.js` to match the directory name change? Or would you rather do that as part of the greater test cleanup? I'm fine either way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Why is this change necessary? `handleSingle()` will cast it to a string, no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "This newly added method should be well defined, should it return `TableIdentifier` or just `String`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate message for this.", + "reference": "have a relation with a product" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I guess that there is still a window here, because the GC could happen between the `PodExist` and `Delete` calls. Would it be better instead to check `err` and allow it if it says \"pod has already been deleted\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "SQLAlchemy's session management does magic to make sure that if the rollback fails you still get the original exception that caused the rollback. Also it looks nicer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This switch statement can be removed. Just return q.items[act.Nonce]!= nil" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I think `==` for nodes is more readable than equals. An equals calls looks like it could be recursing, because intuitively two nodes are equal if their subtree are the equal. But everywhere you replaced, we don't want to test whether the subtrees are structurally equal, we want to know whether they're the same. Only `==` captures this intent, using equals obscures this. Not to mention that equals may NPE and is in that sense less ergonomic. I think we should enhance the rule with a list of types for which `==` is correct. Edit: in the meantime i think we could suppress those new violations..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's a good option.", + "reference": "What's the scenario for passing multiple filters?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "move to after check log.empty()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import docutils.nodes from docutils.nodes", + "reference": "This line needs to be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we delete such const like `CloudBuildSourceEvent` and `CloudBuildSourceBuildId` since all those are contained under schemas/v1?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This is unused." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Any reason not to put `using System.Collections.Generic` (guess there shouldn't be naming conflicts)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Could the name of this controller just be shortened to `TwitterCardsController`? Is the `Player` there adding information?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Backends with hostnames that depend on the request are always up?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import `JsonPointerException` here.", + "reference": "I'd rather catch those to `utils.py` and raise a simple ValueError from them. From the resource point of view, these are details of implementation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "make this 1.0? I don't think all that many people do `language: julia` without any `julia:` specifiers, but may as well keep that possible?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(false)(false)(false)(false)),(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false)(false/set(false/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set/set", + "reference": "nit: `AZURE_KEYVAULT_AUTH_VIA_CLI` is defined by us, so it might be helpful to differentiate it from azure's env names. Maybe starts with `GOCDK`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Depend on interfaces not on structures" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This fix looks good. My concern, don't forget to fix metad too!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `LocalSquashBranchID` instead of `LocalSquashBranchID`.", + "reference": "Just noticed this nil context. Perhaps plumb through ctx too, or change to `Debug`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Does it send requests with urlencoded bodies anywhere? I thought it sends only json. Maybe content-type should be `application/json` by default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Again use of `constexpr` is recomended." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Minor point but I would call this ``redim_graph`` instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "As I was trying to figure out how the error messages are written out, since they are returned from `getOrCreate` and `reconcile`, it looks like we are using plain `klog` to write them out instead of using the logger from the scope above" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Now it's double logging, is not it? Because `service.ipForward.Enable()` logs extra `warning`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]<", + "reference": "Whatever the decision is about the request type to use, this should only match what is needed and not the other one." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "...and in turn, this should probably be var updatePreviews = true; if (!(localConnection && localConnection.type == Blockly.OUTPUT_VALUE) && (Blockly.localConnection_ && Blockly.highlightedConnection_)) { since the first clause is a no-op. If you want to leave it this way for clarity, that's fine too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please remove this TODO, since they will not apply anymore after you are done. :) Can you please remove this everywhere else in this PR?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "This seems like an incomplete schema definition. will that have any effect on the tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "The testing cases are failing because `SetHeader` does not only handle cases where input are from files. It also reads categorical feature indices from the config parameters (see the part outside the `if (filename!= nullptr) {... }`). Skipping `SetHeader` directly here will cause errors when we load data from numpy or pandas arrays (where `filename == nullptr`) and use categorical features. So I think we should move the the check `filename!= nullptr && CheckCanLoadFromBin(filename) == \"\"` into `SetHeader`. That is, we change `if (filename!= nullptr) {... }` into `if (filename!= nullptr && CheckCanLoadFromBin(filename) == \"\") {... }`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I think we should change the variable name of `err` in `if err, ok := err.(*exec.ExitError); ok `, this re-assignment of `err` still affects the next `else` branch" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`Status` has identical semantics with `StatusOr`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add labels here.", + "reference": "why is this named in a different style from other paths?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is not yet set OwnerRef?", + "reference": "Swapped these to ensure that we aren't passing a nil cluster in to util.IsPaused" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a tuple.", + "reference": "I don't see pkgManager used anywhere, is there a reason we need this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should move this to the core descriptor.", + "reference": "A bit late, but I don't think this is necessary, as all callers will send absolute paths. And if you ever get a relative path, resolving it with `toAbsolutePath()` leads to it being relative to whatever CWD the app is started with, while the typical resolving of relative `instanceDir` is to resolve it relative to CoreContainer#coreRootDirectory." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "There's an awful lot of test failures here because `localFieldPathType.schema` may not contain a `getters` array." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/", + "reference": "Mysql allows for `||` concatenation (e.g. `firstname||' '||surname`) if you enable it: `set sql_mode=PIPES_AS_CONCAT;`. I think this check is safer though" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `go-ethereum` package.", + "reference": "NOTE: this is the default ENS registry address. If the ENS suite is deployed from the current builds to any chain, it will always be found at this address." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80", + "reference": "I'm curious why you are using `draw` in this route file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Those variables are only been used once, I think we don't need to create them at all, just pass values to the `GetRawDiff` directly." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.", + "reference": "I like the idea of replacing all the `#if NET461` with `#if NETFRAMEWORK`... is that worth doing now? Means fewer changes if we go to 4.7.2 at some point" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "to fix the docs build failure, make this const var named without the suffix `Name`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This bugfix also included, in case a subjectAlternativeName was present in the cert, then URIs (e.g SVID SPIFFE auth) would not have been attempted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FileProvider` class.", + "reference": "Same here. Feels like the wrong location." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please make `_path_suggestion` public (i.e. remove the `_`) in `downloads.py`." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "Woah, these flag names gotta get shorter. (Edit: I'll try to suggest some if needed, will think on it.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Is this the code that's supposed to use the Rails app's only when in Rails4? What's the point of the first `if app.respond_to?(:secrets)`, both the `if` and the `elsif` have the same body, is only the second one needed? If `app.config` has a `secret_key_base`, then use it, the end. Is there a need for first checking if `app.respond_to?(:secrets)`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))]]]]]]]]]))))))))))]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]])))))))))]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]", + "reference": "Does this not apply to C enums on Linux?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Should this check if the error is `RetryableWriteError` before adding the label?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should have a `.default` property.", + "reference": "Oh wow, that's one complicated require :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR. I don't think we should keep this in a separate PR, but I don't think we should keep it in a separate PR.", + "reference": "do you mean how to \"use\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We can't really test this anymore since ref and props.ref are at the backing node level now" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Did you intend to set this in the constructor?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This looks fine as a first approach, and can we put a TODO here about ubuntu 18.04 being hardcoded?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This isn't strictly needed since lmdb / leveldb data that is unencoded does not require OpenCV IO. I think `DataLayer` should only require lmdb / leveldb. If one tries to use encoded data without OpenCV the `DataTransformer` guards will report the dependency failure." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this error.", + "reference": "Should we take out this change? This was only in there to try to brute force the start of the apiserver yesterday." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]", + "reference": "I worry that this association name is a bit confusing. Yoz was asking me about the concept of completion yesterday, which is why I think of it. It wasn't clear to him exactly what it was. what about calling this a `step_completer`? we know that a proposal has many steps, so I think that might be clearer. in the future, we also might want the rename the `approver` relation because a step is not always an approval these days." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the API version here.", + "reference": "Just add a to-do saying we need to add api-version in the check some time in the future when we enable the single-swagger spec mode for validation." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.", + "reference": "@lunika Please see this. It allows us to do `Propel::getConnection()` easily, as we have only one database." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Not related to this particular cast but I wonder if we shouldn't have a cast helper that would log if null to gain visibility." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "why do we need to explicitly declare these fields?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Note that there are multiple OAI servers -- that's why `$serverClass` is a variable here. You'll want to fetch `$serverClass` from the service manager rather than a hard-coded value, and also set up a module.config.php for the authority record version, `VuFind\\OAI\\Server\\Auth`. Should be easy enough since it can share the same factory." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This is no longer needed and should be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "could use named return params here to avoid declaring the opts, and using naked returns instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "this is an unrelated fix. I noticed when an instagram carousel post is mixed with images and videos, the videos don't come with thumbnails, so I am adding a fallback thumbnail for this case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "\"... after protocol version 1\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Is there a unit test that covers this regexp? I am afraid that changing it might break things =/" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "This change is okay IMO because an `@` variable in Ruby is not a reference -- `@` variables are instance variables. Also, it's never used by the Ruby transformers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Why this change was needed? Because in `po` files it's with curly braces?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Wait -- where did this change come from? This seems unrelated to trace building and seems like it could affect basic execution, unlike the rest of this PR which is all under the off-by-default trace option. Please separate this into its own PR and probably ask @AssadHashmi to review." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `require.resolve` function.", + "reference": "seems to be redundant (mention `docusaurus` )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we combine this with the Rollback API? We could still support the `rollback` method here, but combine `Rollback` and `CherryPick` into something like `ManageSnapshots`. Then we could reuse logic for enforcing checks of the current snapshot. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" (", + "reference": "Maybe just `env_prefix`, I don't think this is referring to the WQ manager." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))$$$$$$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Unrelated line change :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I raised an eyebrow at making `net` depend on `k8s.io`, but it seems we're already doing that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think ticket meant, not applying replacement in this method, but rather applying encodeSomeHtml to each and every localization string" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error`.", + "reference": "ticket for the 4.0 epic?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "`cfg.model.get('neck')` will return None if neck does not exist, thus we can omit the default value." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Trailing whitespace detected." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't see why a `cxxflags` key is necessary? C flags are important in the target file because they define things like the float ABI. But these flags are also used for C++. I can't think of a reason why you would want to configure C++ flags in a target file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Update year range in Copyright notice, and elsewhere too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to be a new one.", + "reference": "Can we update this PR to not be a breaking change? i.e. if a user specifies `accessKeyID`, it is still used. But if a user specifies `accessKeyIDSecretRef`, it takes precedence?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do this.", + "reference": "You don't actually need both tests here as \"truthiness\" means that `\"0\"` is false and hence the first test will be true..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to test this.", + "reference": "Everything else in here is using `I18n`. Should we do that here to be consistent?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::6667::::::::6667;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "What do you think about changing the ordering to be `::`? I think it matches the most with what we previously had so that it doesn't change too much for our users." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm fairly sure this precondition is always true due to the mod (%)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I love seeing diffs like this one, adding a `String` message to an otherwise cryptic `assert`! It makes me realize you must have had a hellacious debugging session!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "1. No logger exists to produce a message 2. Can't assume the latest version because missed version means 0." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I saw a wrong reuse of the cache between a partial analysis of a single file and a full run where errors due to lack of context on the first partial run was reported on the full run. Shouldn't we use a hash that is composer.lock + psalm.xml + command line to be safe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Could you also update it in `at_time`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Because schema is non-final we can't just switch this to a lambda" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "proposal: **always** add the exception to the end of the message. So no need to to pass exception twice (implicit and explicit). Need a lot of changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "why? event.getInvocationType is not you want?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Info` struct.", + "reference": "nit: how about `GitSHA`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "If you move the other functions, this should also be moved to `makeflow_gc.h`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "This whole block bugs me. Expire_time to me suggest that an absolute time of when something happens and duration is an interval of time. While the code looks correct, it feels awkward to read." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Can we add `_dom` as an argument to createVNode here? I think it might be shorter (could totally be wrong!)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "I think that the iret handling is not yet good." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Huh, that's kinda weird. I get it, but it's unexpected to me..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "why is this removed? it is important when you upload from stream of unknown size" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "Out of curiosity, why is this needed? Does it enforce what class can be assigned?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "non-blocking: Now that we have a handful of statements which deal with creating a listener, it may make sense to introduce a `createListener` method or something similar" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "factory should be stateless if possible, looks like much complexity added" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id` and `project_id` for `project_id`.", + "reference": "Could you please add short description for the default value as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "Leave a TODO message to say we will fix the log level in the future, once committing the block and the state become a transaction" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "this can be integer" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "nitpick: Please remove the blank line here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a foreign key here.", + "reference": "What is this for? The only methods I can see by that name in the rails doc are generating a foreign key name from a model class name but you seem to be giving a key name as argument?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be null.", + "reference": "Is this second check necessary? we know that just after the plugin was created its metricRegistry is null, it's set only after `initializeMetrics` has been called." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "shouldn't this be `return TALKACTION_BREAK;` as the player does not meet the required group access?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "does this still work if minerNode1 has already proposed a block before 2 & 3 are stopped?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I am wondering if we can either make this a feature or have a way to turn it off in production. My concern is that we might be adding more of these kind of code in the future." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We can just use `.stack()` here? Then I guess we can reuse when supporting multi-index columns." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "What are the possibilities here? Since we plan on supporting.net standard 2.0 from day 1, we might as well tackle that now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "should the parameters be called reference or context?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Do we need to also change `length` here (and below) to `bytesize`? Perhaps we ought to make a copy of `in_buffer` encoded as binary and then the existing algorithm should work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This should be `toDisplayString()` to not contain e.g. passwords." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we just say that having a non-nil `autocomplete_path` implies that autocomplete is enabled?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "Note that the package github.com/golang/protobuf/proto is deprecated. We're instructed to use the \"google.golang.org/protobuf/proto\" package instead. I didn't want to change it now to avoid intrusive changes whose consequences are, currently, unknown." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]", + "reference": "Are these gone routes? Do we need to 301 them?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "move them to internal group of imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this error is thrown by the CStorPoolController. I'm not sure why this error is thrown, but I don't think it should be.", + "reference": "can we rewrite this as: `ignored event '%s' for cstor pool '%s'`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model. I don't think we should add this to the model.", + "reference": "not all client data types have an approving official (eg: 18F does not). do we still want to include the relation here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `WebElement` interface.", + "reference": "This change should also probably go into the corresponding method of the abstract By class?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "why this remove?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "As the test failures indicate, making this change is going to mean changing everything which currently implements this interface." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "Do we want to redirect this to the forum or something in case people have it linked/bookmarked?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "@peterzimon came up with this 'NM' piece as a placeholder for New Member initials, without this the screen looks broken. It changes to normal initials calculation once email or name is entered. Lmk if you'd like to put something different here ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `ember-data/subscriptions.js`", + "reference": "@kevinansfield Would be cool if you can take a if this is the best way to add `subscriptions` info on member model. This uses the transform + separate model definition way which seemed to be the right way from other references in Admin" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do that.", + "reference": "This is the common way of dealing with optional dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: we can replace all `kr` in this file with like `src`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "same concern here as above" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Thank you for this, I gather this repairs failures that I've seen in another PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This place probably makes sense to me. We can consider exposing an argument to make the dedup step optional (I am not sure it is a good idea but I want to think this through together). The dedup step we are adding is going to trigger a shuffle. Technically, we are fine in the existing expire snapshots action as it does the dedup in `except`. The question is what kind of performance impact deduplicating here will have. We only have duplicates if multiple manifests reference the same files. In `rewrite_manifests` procedure, we rewrite all manifests, meaning we produce a snapshot with new manifests where entries are old data files. Also, there are updates and deletes that may rewrite manifests. I think deduplicating here makes sense to me in all cases. Thoughts, @rdblue @flyrain @RussellSpitzer @karuppayya?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to remove osdconfig from etcd?", + "reference": "can we move the code before deleteNodeFromDB? this way even if the node crashes after remove config we can still re-run decommission again?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Seems the default value of `melt`'s `var_name` at namespace.py should be changed as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a test for this.", + "reference": "I think botocore's serializer should already create the correct headers. However, they are currently not used in `_botocore_parser_integration_test`(line #217). Maybe we could remove the headers here and just use a fallback in the `_botocore_parser_integration_test` (i.e. use the given headers if they are set, otherwise use the headers generated by botocore's serializer)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This code is passing a non localized string when it should be passing in a localized string or it should use the name of the item being deleted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "in case you want to rename one of the plugins when instantiating, from options?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This default variable should be moved into a config variable, created by `package_context`, and read from `config\\package_layout.json`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to test the width returned from the function is not a number.", + "reference": "Can I ask you to add a new line after `const` assignment? I believe that this increases the code readability by encapsulating assignment and logic (expecting) blocks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "So the intention is you configure with `-CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS=\"-D KOKKOS_IMPL_TURN_OFF_CUDA_HOST_INIT_CHECK\"`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This was a bug." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it. I think it's better to use `$htmlAttributes['class']` instead of `$htmlAttributes['class']`", + "reference": "Is OK that we don't have some placeholder?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Sectorbuilder behaves differently depending on whether it's given 1 or more threads. It won't seal if only given 1." + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new dependency.", + "reference": "Sort of believe We should put MetricManager in constructor parameter given this case." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Do we need to check `fieldId` is larger than 1000?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I think this should be called after the if below (the one for disable positive acks)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think we should change it.", + "reference": "I'd like to avoid changing this method since it is public and using a URI will probably change behavior for users passing strings (String -> URI -> Path instead of String -> Path)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Should these restore the stashed env after the test runs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We're calculating the full list of kwargs here (even if the first element of the list would return True) so we could improve performance by using a generator line 408 in ``for default_node in all_defaults:``." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can ndelta differ depending on when the deltas are compacted? That is, when intermediate updates are dropped?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Our checkstyle config likes it better when the `

    ` is before the first word of the next paragraph, and not on a blank line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we want to close criuServer.Close()", + "reference": "This looks to be the only place where we return early before the close below, so if the \"double close\" is bothering people, closing manually here (and removing the `defer`) could be an option" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This task can probably be deleted since we don't need gulp to run Jest." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Doesn't this need to include `Errno::ECONNRESET` to fix the issue?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `@faker.version` for this. I don't think we should have a `@faker.version` for this.", + "reference": "never heard of a qirector... what's their role again? (also should be 'for a movie')" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not do that. I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Implement the \"collect all props for one vertex\" logic inside QueryVertexPropsProcessor" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "This is to prevent parsing things like \"1.1\" as \"1\" until we implement it properly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can we change `_getCheckpointParentDir` to be a public function explicitly? It seems like something that clients of experiment runner may wish to use." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Why is a restart necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Should setting the task runtime also go under the above if condition?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable? I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "SPIRE uses the leadingLowerCase convention for unexported constants" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.", + "reference": "The newest JSchema code generator orders `System` usings first." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table", + "reference": "I understand that we want to have a possibility to configure the IcebergInputFormat to be case sensitive or case insensitive since it can be used by other MR jobs as well. Do we want to allow the users of Hive to shot themselves on the foot and enable case sensitivity? My first guess would be that we should not use the configuration here, just go with `false`, but if you have some specific use-case in your mind I can be easily convinced" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "Will the above call to cStorPoolAddEventHandler() get executed in the same thread as this line?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))((())))(((((((((((((((((( code code code code", + "reference": "I don't think alloca instructions are always at the start of the entry block. I think it would be safer to check the entire entry block for alloca instructions, just in case some are not the first instruction. (Technically they can be anywhere in the function but we check in other places that this isn't possible)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "Why isn't this 4789 (which I think is the Felix default)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the error.", + "reference": "Can this be `Import operations failure`? In addition, is this the right time to change the variable names? e.g. `ReasonImportOperationsFailure`, `ReasonImportFailure`, `ReasonImportSuccessful`, `ReasonCreateResourceFailure`, `ReasonImportResourceSuccessful` Naming convention that i have assumed here is as follows: `Reason`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I suspect this isn't needed because I think `rb_intern` gets marked already." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "This change is incorrect: the current log level is correct." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Can you add a space before the equal sign? There are a couple other places where spaces are missing in this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to remove UpdaterThread in executorManager and deprecate handleAjaxUpdateRequest()()?", + "reference": "Please follow the todo naming convention." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new column to the table.", + "reference": "These are no longer used and changes should instead be made directly to the files in `deploy/chart/crds` /assign @JoshVanL /unassign" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Is this really necessary to work around this way? The old version works fine with me when converting to ONNX." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Same as above: don't start error strings with a capital letter, and don't fix unneeded things in an unrelated commit ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is this a testing debug statement?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the connectionStringObject from the server?", + "reference": "you'll need to wrap the _whole thing_ within this async call (or refactor it so everything below is in a new temporary function). The code below this section depends on a value for `object` after the parsing occurs, but what you're doing here is kicking off a race condition where `object` is null, but _might_ parse quickly enough to assign it the parsed parts. Instead, you need to do everything that depends on the parsed object in the callback of `parse`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex mutex", + "reference": "This is now going to be protecting `stopped` when it doesn't need to. If you are going to do this then can you make `stopped` non-atomic and protect it in `stop`. It's cheap to make a `unique_lock` fyi, it's just a pointer to a mutex and a `bool`. The `lk.lock ()` in the loop is superfluous so probably shouldn't have been there to begin with." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the remote config to the config file.", + "reference": "Lets not give packages names if we dont have to. If a package requires a rename, we should change the actual name while/if we can." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Not sure I see where this is coming from. This is a bug fix? Should be mentioned in the commit message? Same below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "I reverted this change in the last commit, I think we should revert it here. I know this leads to confusing test output for skipped tests, but I would prefer to tackle that in a separate PR specifically focused on that problem. In fact, I think the issue might really be with the leak checker, and not how this test runner is defined. Please make a ticket for this (if it doesn't already exist) and revert this change" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Can this part be done in `dataset.get_ann_info`? Just like CocoDataset converts xywh to xyxy in `_parse_ann_info`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should we change the name of this test struct to be `testTracerProvider` as well?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.", + "reference": "\"google.golang.org/grpc\" should be together with \"go.uber.org/zap\" all \"\"github.com/iotexproject/iotex-core/*\" stay together" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #", + "reference": "No need for a separate variable here - just call `utils.read_file` directly below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Thanks for the fixing, small question, Here the message just be written to the channel, will it be blocked?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "maybe we will have something like `Bodies []byte(\"bodies\")` instead of them being a number? with numbers we are making it harder to insert stages mid-process." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "out of curiosity, why making this change? If no real reason, could you restore to avoid unnecessary changes of several generated files?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Could we public events if `manager.serStatus()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "could be misread as ``, maybe something redundant but very clear like \"before the closing `` tag\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "This test is specifically checking behavior on sync I/O (note there are tests with Write in the name, and other tests with WriteAsync). Enable sync I/O here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `WeeklyIterationDripMailerPreview`", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the source volumeID to the CStorVolumeClaimClaimSpec struct.", + "reference": "nit: Should we have something like `volumeName@snapShotname` and this will be filled only if it is a clone creation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This seems like an improved pattern :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import snakebite from snakebite", + "reference": "I think it would be better to have a separate configuration option for specifying which HDFS interaction layer to use instead of using the existing hadoop version option. I think there are still cases where things might have to rely on Hadoop version for other things, and overwriting that information with \"snakebite\" would make that difficult. The existing hadoop version option could still be used to distinguish the different HDFS CLI flavours." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why are we filtering content twice? It seems like just filtering it in PAL should work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `multiple`", + "reference": "These should probably move to `constants.js`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "Again, you don't want to depend on glassfish." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should deprecate this.", + "reference": "it should be `Faker::Space.launch_vehicle`, otherwise it will crash" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `DeleteOldDateArchive` method. I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Isn't it quite expensive to check whether the file exists on every write?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please hide this behind a flag and add a setter function to the builder." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this route.", + "reference": "old api should be deprecated if we don't intend on using it anymore. Again this should happen through swagger api and then removed from next release. We should also release not this as a breaking change. (same with all the other cloudsnap api renames." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "so strange...... canTcpListen is to detect, if this transport can init when customers deployed vertx and servlet rest transport, we must detect which one will be used only both of them refused to init is a problem. we have already print that......" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this to `SELECT_COUNT_FORM`", + "reference": "Did you mean for this to be `FORM`, instead of `FROM`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `aws_secret_manager`.", + "reference": "What are your thoughts on the long term solution for the naming of this variable? Do you think we should revert the logic when we are ready to make the next set of breaking API changes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "There's a syntax error on this line." + }, + { + "prediction": "error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code code error code error code code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code error code", + "reference": "You lose the value of `result` when you `goto out`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate file.", + "reference": "Just a style thing, why not `this.ratio_ || 0`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "I think the stdlib's `net.IP` has a `Mask()` method, does that do what we need?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why does substitute need to be public? Are we allowing/encouraging variable usage when using Daisy as a library?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "We should probably use ctrl-enter if `tab` is given, just like in `follow_selected`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This file looks like anti pattern `ServiceLocator` and lucky it's not used anywhere. Can I remove it? (in separate PR)." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "we can just have this method call the next, passing in the file metadatas (deduplication of logic)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "What happens here if you send the `wheelEvent` directly to the `tabbed_browser` and let it take care of propagating it to its children (i.e. the focused tab)? If that works, I guess that'd be cleaner." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.", + "reference": "it seems python 2 don't support `end=''`. @StrikerRUS @henry0312 any better solution? or we drop the support of python 2?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This test already exists in the object_tracker layer." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Same here, can we presume if `privacyParameters` is set we need goQuorum handling? Or is there a goQuorum sub option in `privacyParametes`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Why not just delete the manifests?", + "reference": "The addition of delete files in `newManifests` far above the addition of data files threw me a bit. Is it intentional to ensure the delete files are at the front of the list?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid error.", + "reference": "Interesting. The call to `Array(groups)` below this would seem to indicate this doesn't _have_ to be an array. I think the problem is actually that passing a hash to `Array()` actually converts the hash to an array of key/value pairs rather than wrapping it in an array. So maybe `Array(groups)` should be `groups = [groups] unless groups.is_a?(Array)`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it should be a constant. I think it should be a constant.", + "reference": "This is not a particularly good default but we need it to keep the old behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think we need this anymore.", + "reference": "We have other tests to assert all properties of a condition are valid. It's enough to assert the condition is not nil here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "shouldn't the import be renamed `crdv1alpha1` by convention? It seems that you took care of renaming everywhere else..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "nit: Can Linux-specific paths be moved to a conditionally-compiled file for Linux?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This is not the right approach. The `Distributor` maintains a model of the current state of the Grid. That model already contains the information about every active session. We don't need to modify `SessionMap` to expose it further." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure what this error message is.", + "reference": "Git doc seems to suggest `for-push` is a optimization. Do we have a plan/ticket for treating them differently?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This not necessary since you moved the layers to `contrib/`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "I think this also needs to be removed from `resources/bolt_bash_completion.sh`, `rakelib/pwsh.rake`, `lib/bolt_spec/plans.rb`, and `lib/bolt/config/options.rb`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I fixed this today with a direct push to master. My build was failing otherwise." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `DeleteRuleViolationFix` class.", + "reference": "not sure why this is in a \"rule\" child package from the interface..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Not needed, please remove." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Shouldn't the logic be: * the result is a mismatch if either is a unix path but the other is not * if both are unix paths, then perform case-sensitive comparison * if both are not unix paths, then perform case-insensitive comparison" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is just rearranging it alphabetically" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "I think this disables it for the rest of the file - you should be able to use it inside of the function instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "this could receive the MediaInterface directly or an identifier, it is correct to type it with int|string? or just use mixed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why not return `Object[]`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Looks like we are trying to match the new ordering of fields in `ManifestFile`. Earlier, we co-located `...FilesCount` with `...RowsCount` to match the ordering of methods in `ManifestFile` and args in constructors. Is this change intentional?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "You're already setting drop loot to false just above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`once` is very generic and doesn't specify it's purpose - `closeOnce`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be renamed to metadataLocation", + "reference": "Why did this need to change from `private`? Oh for the test below. And this is only a test class too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should test the `has?` method here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think you want to be asserting/clicking $saveLink, not $link." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name of the sensor.", + "reference": "We don't have `target_name` on `@sensor` - why introduce it for `@asset_sensor`? If we do want to introduce it everywhere, can we just call it `job_name` to avoid introducing a new term?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Missing copyright header (+other new files)." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Could we do the flag check here as well to check whether or not we have enabled the \"Handle without timezone\" flag here as well? We may be using this not on the read path (like in the migrate/snapshot code) and it would be good to catch it here as well and make sure users know what is happening." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "why is the file named `pipeline_definition_definition_sensor`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "None not needed, can just be `return`. not important for this release" + }, + { + "prediction": "This service is gracefully provided to enable development on the Algorand blockchain test networks. Please do not abuse it by requesting millions of Algos.```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````", + "reference": "I think it's missing closing `

    ` tags in line 108 and 109 unless they don't matter..." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "So it seems that loading a script file from the classpath needs to be enabled explicitly now since this is `false` by default. Is it possible to enable this via the YAML config file in a Camunda Platform Run distribution?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "can we delete any code in the provider implementation? i imagine the entire thing is unused now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this function is not used anymore.", + "reference": "I suggest we remove all these unused functions. I don't expect any external projects to be importing packages from `cert-manager/test/...`" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Looks like the template argument doesn't resolve by default so you need `std::lock_guard lck`" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Are we removing this public method? Could it be useful to someone? Maybe we could implement it once in Node using the metamodel" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Plan` class.", + "reference": "I think this method is unused now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in the `NetworkPolicyStatusController` class.", + "reference": "I know we discussed this before and decided to reuse the AntreaPolicy gate. But do you think realization status will introduce much overhead or not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")((((((((()))))))))))(((((((((())))))))))))))(((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));", + "reference": "please add a blank line at the end of this file. Applicable to similar cases below" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a valid host.", + "reference": "This is not really needed, the line added in `GridNodeConfiguration.java` is what really fixes the `remoteHost` regression." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "filterCache can be null" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `if (strnlen(param_value, SERVER_LOOPBACK_MODE_PARAM) == 1) { { { { { } } } )", + "reference": "If strstr returns NULL, the check on 378 won't fire, because param_name will be at least SET_PARAM_CMD_LEN." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Does this change affect the performance of other algorithms, except KMeans?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What do these changes have to do with the request ID?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'm kind of surprised this doesn't require `typename`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `go-algorand/config.go`", + "reference": "nit: move this one down." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "maybe'standard Tukey boxplot definition' if it is standard? Otherwise sounds like it is just *a* definition for boxplots..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "I feel we should not fix this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I think these are not necessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "Please update the user guide too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "If you use `compact('name', 'code')` here, you'll get an associative array, which might make the rest of the code more readable (instead of using hard-coded 0/1 indexes)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "Should it be 2011-14 instead ;-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I want to write some type of test for this but there are not Getter methods to assert this value. I tried to extract the value via the stats that are exposed without luck." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This needs to take the group id, not the gsuite id." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the schema.", + "reference": "These should use the constants defined in JsonTests.cs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Kind of unrelated to this PR, but let's update this to `getDataErrorComponent('search-console', error.message, false, false, false, error )` so that everything is passed as expected." + }, + { + "prediction": "We should not do this in a future PR.", + "reference": ":obj:\\`dataset\\` cannot be correctly rendered" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `bookmark_for_documents` method in the `bookmark_for_documents` method.", + "reference": "I think `email` is something we get from devise, and I think the goal of putting it in the generator was not to tie others to that particular implementation?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC(LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "If the span producers pushing to the queue do so faster than the this can drain, it will cause this to hang. I'm guessing we can update the `enqueue` method to check if the `stopCh` is closed and not send any more spans while this flushes what has already been pushed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Not sure about that, an array is iterable right? But if I pass array, that clear method wont work" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "make sure the config changes stuck. are there any invalid config values? maybe write tests around empty `trust_domain`, negative/missing `ttl`, invalid `key_size`, etc..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this in the future.", + "reference": "Why are you changing this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a valid format string.", + "reference": "@phirefly Can we look at a list of RWAs, or ask someone to double-check that this format is correct? Otherwise :shipit:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this option.", + "reference": "Still request a local sort for bin-packing based on the defined table sort order." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")(useuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuseuse\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));", + "reference": "As with the other PR, user name is better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "a peer's accounting lock is held during `Pay`. we should avoid adding additional blockchain calls here if possible." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Maybe wording could be improved. Is this \"not enabled\" or it is \"not available\". Not sure about that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I looked at the new `conditionalBranchesEvaluated` function and it looks like the part added is a duplicate of the line above?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::", + "reference": "can you put this flag in `blockRefInfo` instead? It would be a shame to add one more file per block, especially since we've run into inode limits. I guess `blockRefInfo` should maybe then be renamed to `blockInfo` or something. But we're stuck with the filename." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we keep other parameters if only IP is empty? Or maybe return an error if it's a mandatory argument?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the test to use `floatdim` instead of `floatdim`.", + "reference": "Was this just wrong before? The names indicated types but type wasn't specified. I guess the tests passed as comparison worked with ``type=None``?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "icebergCol.name() is the unqualified column name" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a list, not a list.", + "reference": "It's generally a bad idea to use mutable types like lists as default values for parameters. Lots of strange, difficult to debug side effects can occur. I see that there was already one example of this prior to this commit which probably explains why it seemed innocuous to add more but I'm going to rework this before committing to master." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "We run prettier as an eslint plugin, so this harmful" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Check if the TypeDescriptor and MemberDescriptor includes are necessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "delete the empty line here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [89/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "You don't need to expose this method to do what you want. There are already public addNewGetMapping, addNewPostMapping, and addNewDeleteMapping methods." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate test for this.", + "reference": "This test passes in `dev`. Why wouldn't this work?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature. I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature. I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature. I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature. I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature. I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature. I don't think we should use the AWS SDK for Python (Boto3) with PyTest and the AWS Device Farm testing feature.", + "reference": "ARN -> Amazon Resource Number (ARN)" + }, + { + "prediction": "?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????)???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????", + "reference": "Why not use the overload that takes an instance?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "`Blockchian` is a misspelling of `Blockchain` (from `misspell`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`agent/gpu/nvidia_gpu_manager_unix.go:47: struct field lock has json tag but is not exported`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: better rename to `TEST_QUEUE_ARN` or `TEST_EVENT_SOURCE_ARN`" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Would this mean that podMonitorSelectors suffer from the same issue if they are the only configuration set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `GetEnvironment` method.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in GetEnvironment" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We usually use OkDialog()" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's a good option.", + "reference": "could we please change that to something that indicates that this feature is not \"production\" ready!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the pretrained model here.", + "reference": "swim -> swin. Other configs and file names also should be modified." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "nit: arg description for \"key\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "If we don't have a `dir` yet, we wouldn't need to do a sync right? If so, perhaps we can just `getStoredDir()` like `Attr()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate PR.", + "reference": "I still don't seem to fully understand this. Why are we testing the host if DR_HOST_NOT_TARGET is not set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to do this.", + "reference": "in the current implementation, both schemes are supported (you can call either `/bzz` or `/v1/bzz`). i would suggest to keep it this way" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "hmm, I think we can just do `new Error(assembly.error)` and that should set `error.message` correctly too. I don't know why it was done this way with a separate `.message` assignment before :sweat_smile: Should we do `error.assembly = assembly` so the template editor can access it that way, rather than parsing `error.details`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This should never be empty. The access field always needs a value of at least `c:0` or `r:0`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Another question is, do we want to call `os.Getenv()` every time we parse a file? That seems a lot." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "minor: please rename all occurrences of `A` to `T`. please also rename `v` to `value`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `SyncModeSelectorConstants.BeamSyncFastSyncLag` class.", + "reference": "Do we want it to be so dynamic? My first idea was to base it on SyncConfig.BeamSync." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "can you change this instead to just `type.toString()` and then you wouldn't have to expose the getBitMask in the enum. (Alternatively you could have used `type.hashCode()` but that doesn't feel as nice)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm confused by these tests. Shouldn't the template string `@importance_type@` have been replaced with the actual value of `importance_type`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "Let's keep using NewKeeper so that it got covered by tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I only see new imports. Is there any functional change in this file?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "ineffectual assignment to `err` (from `ineffassign`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Would you mind removing the default parameter above? (I doubt I'll ever use defaults again since you still have to protect against callers explicitly passing `null` or `undefined`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Make sure the old logging functions still work, but add deprecation warnings (unfortunately Python suppresses deprecation warnings by default, so I'm not sure if anyone'll notice)." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Not directly related to the topic of this ticket: I think this API design is a bit confusing. To disable delemetry, I would write `managementService.enableTelemetry(false)` which is not intuitive to read. Maybe `toggleTelemetry` instead of `enableTelemetry` is more clear." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Again I suggest returning `AnnotatedCodeLocation[][]`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.", + "reference": "We should probably require an increased verbosity to output for anything below the cluster itself to avoid spamming the logs. It would also be good to give additional context as to what we are attempting to reconcile since the controller has multiple workers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Not needed anymore" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Am I right in thinking this completely avoids the situation where `enable_calltarget_state_by_ref` is `true`, but the managed integrations don't expect a by ref argument? For example, if there's an exception here, that seems like a fatal problem, as we would have a mismatch for jit rewriting? We should disable instrumentation entirely in that case shouldn't we? i.e. if this (or the existing `EnableByRefInstrumentation`) calls fail, should we bail out of this method entirely as we can't safely instrument?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "nit: spaces seem off" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "shouldn't the em parameter be called ec?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Please change this to use o.DidSign(o) as implements this logic without performing any of these checks that duplicate something that JWT can do correctly. If the JWT deserialized properly, and DidSign returns true, the JWT was signed by one of the listed operator keys." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `SearchResult` class.", + "reference": "Talking about style, IMO extracting either `getComponent()` or `getPubDate()` to variables would make this line easier to read." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "package header missing" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Just a thought (doesn't change the output or anything) - do you think we'll ever want to access the other properties of `oldVNode` from within `_childDidSuspend`? If so we could pass `oldVNode` here and then check these properties in the _childDidSuspend implementation. I don't have strong feelings either way, just occurred to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "Doctrine\\ODM\\PHPCR\\Id\\RepositoryIdInterface?", + "reference": "We should be configuring the base paths somewhere.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "May also need to test the normal functionality with min/max_sizes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `NetworkDefinition` class.", + "reference": "We can remove this one. It's just a random one I got for free for testing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a button here. I don't think we should add a button here.", + "reference": "(maybe this should be MyDevice or just removed entirely?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the task handler.", + "reference": "Can you do a nil check here, as the task isn't always nil here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `AnalyticsDashboardWidgetPopularPagesTable.js`", + "reference": "`lodash` shouldn't be grouped under WordPress dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug, but I don't think it should be a bug.", + "reference": "Does order matter? Should we sort by enode key to make duplication checking easier?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Can you explain this too? This seems to go beyond linting." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "I just moved this into the render.js UT file since this test doesn't actually use an components" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We do have to capture and check the err here right? I don't think we need to capture the location of the file though for this context." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "an unused import" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "If this value doesn't exist (do an `, ok :=...` check), we should initialize and store it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Would use parenthesis to explicitly state the associations of operands ```js const MAX_SAFE_INTEGER = Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER || (-(2 ** 53) - 1)" + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't want a timeout while we're waiting for data. We don't want a timeout while we're waiting for data. We don't want a timeout while we're waiting for data.", + "reference": "This handle is now private to pyserial, but if there is no public function to retrieve it I guess this is the best we can do." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to make a function that returns a void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void void", + "reference": "This function is what **the compositor** calls when it wants to fullscreen a client, not what the client calls." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "s/not existed Pod/non-existing Pod" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why did we not leave this as just `svcDescriber`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: I think we've been (in)consistent in leaving a blank line here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a column, but I don't think it should be a column.", + "reference": "Maybe we can change it to a more generic name like source_id." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "What's the theory on why this could fix the hang? It seems like the call to `GetRootNodeForTest` will always need to call into the crypto object before returning an error, and so it should block on that `c` receive, after which the test immediately drains `errCh`. So I don't quite see how buffering would help..." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Maybe add an assert in arch_init or somewhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I wonder what does this `// nolint` ignore? And what are the standards that you choose which error to fix and which to ignore?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "what about the line below, forceUpdateCollection?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Doesn't this go in the opposite direction of #1051 / #1062 by putting platform-specific logic back into this module?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "I think this is the only line in JS legacy code that should be updated based on the renaming. `global.googlesitekit.setup.isAuthenticated = response.authenticated;` would be sufficient to keep the old name for the legacy JS data (which will be phased out in the long term) while supporting the new name in the API route. All updates to the JS components above wouldn't be necessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Technically, this would allow `pingWaitTime` to be `false`. I don't know if it matters here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "I only want the proxy request for this to run for kinesalite. So this just returns true if the KINESIS_PROVIDER is kinesis-mock" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.", + "reference": "Please add your name to the list of copyright holders." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Maybe maxRetryTimes should be bigger than 2. Return Max(maxRestryTime, 2)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Call `userName` is good enough, `signedUserName` is narrowing the actual usage of this method." + }, + { + "prediction": "@kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk", + "reference": "How would you feel about a static method to express intent?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "Do we know for sure that no other code changed its value? (Maybe some weird testing use case or something) Why not just use the actual value instead of risk lying?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "the partInstall.go isn't an auto-generated file, and the part.sql doesn't exists either." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`k` is unused in PutHash" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Use IOUtils instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It's not related to the line of code, but I don't know how to write it in a more proper place. Looks like `e2e/myst-provider/db/myst.db` should be in `.gitignore` file and should not be commited." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nice touch since Google likes to change things every now and then." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `", + "reference": "Make `CircuitBreakerManager` implement `PluginInfoInitialized`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))())(()))(((()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This is extra awkward, QVariant.convert() takes a QMetaType which takes the value of a QMetaType.Type." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to pass it into NewTypedWriter.", + "reference": "Nit: finished -> finish, \"done passing it\" -> \"passed it\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Maybe mention that it will be saved to the filesystem otherwise?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Probably cleaner and more general to do this: string,Format(\"Column {0}\", i+1) That way if the local language has a convention like \"3 column, this is\" it still works." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a new action. I think it would be better to add a new action.", + "reference": "This can be uniformed too" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "It looks to me that this does not have to be exported." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to create a new ApiConfig.", + "reference": "It looks like this is only used in order to extract the snippet file names from GapicProviderFactory. I wonder if it would be better expose the snippet file names directly, without exposing a test-only function in non-test code." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))(----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Another question: this is being removed, but I don't see a corresponding removal if it being called? Was it never used (or am I just missing it)? (is it related to what was in the onclick that got removed, i.e. was that supposed to call this and not something in the backing bean?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Suggestion: `.. does not have an Approved condition set to true`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean. I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "I would say that client class should have default of False and Cloud prov should enable deleting." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Did this remove the BOM or something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules, but I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules. I don't think we should add a rule to the list of rules.", + "reference": "This makes the BlockHeaderValidator mutable, and IMHO should not be done. Note we have a builder that has the exact same method, so instead of mutating a produced BlockHeaderValidator we should hook into wherever the builder is being created." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "May be add information about parameters to the doc string while at it?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))setsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetset", + "reference": "Naming of this sounds a bit awkward. Perhaps priv_legacy_getTransactionCount or priv_legacyGetTransactionCount?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This one should probably be added to the list in #24. It's possibly indicative of an issue, but there isn't a VUID for it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why this indentation change? Seems the original indentation would be fine, and leaves more room." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendend))))))));));));));));));));));endendendendendendendendendendend));));));));));));));));));));));));endend.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.));));));));));));));));));));));.end.end.end.end.end.end....................................................................................................................................", + "reference": "Would be nice to know what the `update` argument does in the docstring." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I think we can just use `io.BytesIO` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "This ensures that the User-Agent header matches during replay." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "What units are used for this default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I am wondering if it makes sense to make this a flag to `flatc` rather than a preprocessor flag, since this is generated code, it would make more sense to simply omit this code completely if the flag is not specified" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Doesn't this change the behavior (edit: oh, I see, never mind)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think you need a `do` at the end of this line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Not passing in a `:params` key here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Feels like this should be an option and not the default. Leaving them running would give you immediate response to claims, which might be what some people would want. Hibernation is AWS only right now and probably other clouds will just disregard the setting but arguably validation should be rejecting attempts to create / update powerstate on gcp/azure/etc. I'd pitch we put this onto the pool spec and make you opt in." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\"),\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "I think I saw somewhere that it has been fixed and that you can use #NETCOREAPP3_0_OR_GREATER but I may be wrong." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "what's the second part for?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "It's not clear to me what the \"super\" test above is for. As far as I can see, the test runs a spellcheck for \"super\" but then uses \"fob\" as the index into suggestions, which will never find an entry." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "revert this file change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.", + "reference": "I think this is the most elegant way to allow us to still fail on `I`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Doctrine's``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````", + "reference": "Wouldn't it be better to use a sql `IN ( :exact_value )`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "So far this is not working as expected... working to further investigate WinRM protocol and the gems behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "So now there're two ways to get requests: `ScenarioExecutor.get_requests()` and `Scenario.get_requests()`. To avoid confusion we should probably make `Scenario.get_requests()` method private, or hide it in some other way." + }, + { + "prediction": "))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This existed already, but seeing as you are changing the variable to have an explicit type it could be made a const reference to remove a copy." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I don't think this code is being tested; this method can be removed without the test failing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AsyncTask` class.", + "reference": "@codepoet2017390 You have already initialized this ArrayList in the onPreExecute method then why do it here too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This covers the `RESTRICT_ACCESS=true` x non-gsa pair, but we probably want to test the three other permutations: (`RA=true`, gsa), (`RA=false`, non-gsa), (`RA=false`, gsa)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please don't do this - if you want to disable code permanently delete the code, if you need to disable it to test don't commit. Such sections are very poorly highlighted during review and can cause unspotted issues slipping through the process..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm starting too feel we have too much abstraction and too many interfaces here. But this method is definitely the most confusing IMO. For one, it's called \"Get*\" but it does not return anything... I don't have a good understanding of what's going on anymore, so it's hard for me to suggest an alternative, but it's pretty clear to me that this interface needs to be rethought. An interface where all the parameters are themselves arbitrary objects (`interface{}`), whose actual type depends on the specific interface implementation, is not a helpful abstraction" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "It fills me with endless sadness that we can't use Selenium's own `SessionId` here." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Interesting. So you've found that it's faster to request only the \"Stat\" without the data so long as this is the typical path?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Is this a future fix? I thought the local identifier scope and the package issue were the same one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Not super important, but this line could be split up." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free free", + "reference": "Maybe we should better call the dispose function without checking the value of `item.data` (since the dispose function is setup before `data` is set up)." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Why set to GPU, is it CPU?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "This should be `computed('i18n.locale'....`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "can we not expose the channel directly? or at least expose it as a read only channel?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we add a `--with-bashcompdir` here to override this? I'd like to be able to do unprivileged builds." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "We will be removing this maya/volume package completely. Do not use this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not throw host_bad_alloc() here.", + "reference": "Why you think that `model_ptr` will be `nullptr` when memory allocation is failed? I think `new daal_knn::Model(column_count)` would throw `std::bad_alloc` if `operator new` is not overloaded. Is it overloaded by DAAL in the way it simply returns `nullptr` in case of bad allocation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Where does this 0.001 come from? Is this from the network collateral cost function, which happens to be hardcoded right now? I think it's going to rot very quickly: it depends on sector size and (probably) block height." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "Please update the license header in each source file. For more information see: #2697" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "!numbers -> numbers" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "so we don't have universal rules afterwards? In that case I'd remove this entirely (and maybe some places where it's used get cleaner) since we shouldn't ever add a universal rule. Not only because it's way simpler in TS, I'm also just super skeptical about \"universal\". In case of this rule, even control characters may have their place in Swaggers, e.g. in `examples` sections where you can have raw response bodies where control characters are perfectly valid." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "You're welcome to surface this option through the API, but I'm not going to make this the default behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `buildStatic` or `buildStatic`?", + "reference": "Just a thought that any further extensions of `buildBinaryFor` signature could be done as `buildBinaryFor(..., opts... BuildOptions)` for better readability." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "I'll fix the InMemoryExporter right after this PR lands" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to log this error?", + "reference": "Good call, none of these are technically invalid" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "this one should be updated too" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "maybe need to add microserviceId too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning, but I don't think it should be a warning.", + "reference": "I'm curious, do you create this commit at the very end by rebasing and taking the value you had after moving everything?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "It's no longer possible to use `modifyRow` to trim rows and that's ok to use TrimRows instead. But I think we should move this test to TrimRows plugin tests as `trimRows` setting is not a part of the `core`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the value from the config file?", + "reference": "The function seems to either return \"default\" or return the extension stripping the preceding dot. Does the fact mean that we can no longer register `.default` as an extension?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "this may require a statefile version update" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the file.", + "reference": "I like when `@deprecated` contains how to resolve it - eg. \"use `SplFileObject::fgetcsv()` instead\". The information in upgrade notes is usefull only during upgrade." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this. I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "Nice to see that your local environment is up-to-date now for these changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Instead of setting it to null, i think lets set it to {}" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the version here.", + "reference": "We should bump this before releasing and remove all legacy fields that are safe to do so. Since we cannot have multiple versions anyway there's little value in walking around with the \"alpha\" stamp." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I might suggest a different name for the `DEEPBIND` config.h macro. Perhaps `FLUX_DEEPBIND` to give a hint in the code that we're using a locally provided define." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Code generated by protoc-gen-go. **DO NOT EDIT.**. The correct way to fix `deprecated` in this file may be updating the protoc / protobuf / grpc and regenerate this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.", + "reference": "We should make sure that we cover the testcases in a new unit test class." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Is this only used in test code? Is there future utility in it for production code? If not, it would be nice if this could be moved into a test package. I'm not sure how hard that would be. CC @laser" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if config.WebhookLabel!= \"\" or config.APIServiceLabel!= \"\"", + "reference": "Super curious how you noticed this, as SPIRE itself currently only configures once...?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not change the error message.", + "reference": "This `startsWith` seems a bit brittle because in the code base we'll occasionally spell it \"DataFile\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "if it keeps reconnecting for too long, how should we get alerted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "it's better to use single name style in one name." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "As defaultSendPort is being removed, and I don't like TODOs on examples, please remove the whole line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to update update update update update update update update update update update update update update update update update", + "reference": "Should we return `nil` when `err == errChangeSetEmpty` instead of calling l.103 `WaitUntilStackUpdateCompleteWithContext`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Hmmm I thought spotless would wrap this line, but it doesn't seem to complain about it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think this will require updating the api version. we are planning to do this anyways, so perhaps we can lump this in so we don't have to update too many times?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())((((((((((((((((( code code code code code code. code. code.", + "reference": "revert this for parity" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "INCR_BATCH and DECR_BATCH could be exposed as tuneable command line options but that might be too low level to expose. I think keeping private for now where \"in the know\" folks could use to try and tune makes sense. These values were choosen mostly \"at random\" and have worked out for us thus far." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `TagWriter` class. I don't think that's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Currently this isn't very clean because we have to re-use some of the predefined parser types - the demo uses WRITER_U_CTAGS but there should be some support for custom writer type." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think this was left it accidentally :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you finish re-ordering this list to match the one that was deleted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it, but I'm not sure if it is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "Do we need to check if `exp.Target.StressChaos` is `nil`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a description for this. I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "not calling this is going to impact current functionality which depends on PVC.. let us still call this and set the values to default as 'none' (or empty) by handling the error from 'get' operation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`!=` is no the same as `<`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `TransformerEncoderLayer` and `TransformerEncoderLayer` in the `TransformerEncoderLayer` and `TransformerEncoderLayer` in the `TransformerEncoderLayer` and `TransformerEncoderLayer` in the `TransformerEncoderLayer` and `TransformerEncoderLayer` in the `TransformerEncoder` and `TransformerEncoder` in the `TransformerEncoder` and `TransformerEncoder` in the `TransformerEncoder` and `TransformerEncoder` in the `TransformerEncoder` and `TransformerEncoder` in the `TransformerEncoder`.", + "reference": "No need to create a dir for transformer. Simply move transformer.py into mmdet/models/utils/" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Intent.ACTION_CREATE_SHORTCUT` class.", + "reference": "Can't you just add `SelectSubscriptionActivity` directly to the manifest instead of opening `MainActivity` that then starts it?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Maybe say \"the spec's %check section\" so it's clearer what we mean." + }, + { + "prediction": "isSorted()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()", + "reference": "I think after change this check `rowInMapper === null` is always false, so it's useless." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "ClockIpLpi2c4.Enable() is required. The same change is required for enablePeripheralClocks()." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure how to do that.", + "reference": "nit: this should be `SHA` since it is an acronym for `Secure Hash Algorithm`, no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Not sure if Intl can be defined but not `Intl.DateTimeFormat`. Both seem to have the same percentage on CanIUse." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "PTAL, looks like the order of PVC & PV is reversed for different storage-engine types, for Jiva/CStor the args sent to sendEventOrIgnore are `PV, PVCName`." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Remove the trailing white space" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "No need to modify this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "would be nice at some point to clean this signature up... not relevant for this PR" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid field. I think it should be a valid field.", + "reference": "Here, is it `null` because it is `null` in `$fieldConfiguration`, or because it has been set to `null` above in the `array_replace`? If it doesn't exists at all in `$fieldConfiguration`, I think you should add `type => 'text'` above in the `array_replace`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I was thinking about this for #2928 too, which also uses `endsWith`... Presumably `SomeOtherObject` would match `endsWith(\"Object\")`, meaning that something more sophisticated like splitting it then iterating right to left would be needed in order to do this robustly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I think this name is a bit confusing because if you asked someone what type of exporter they were using they would probably say Zipkin or Jaeger, etc. How about `ProcessorType` with `Simple` and `Batch` definitions?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "`req` is unused in RecreatePipedKey" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this message.", + "reference": "The \"Adsense\" term needs to be capitalized - I just noticed this was wrong through ACs and IB, so not a problem of the PR itself really. I'll quickly fix it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "do which methods need to be registered? is it basically just the ones that are directly referenced in ParDo calls? (The Beam GoDoc doesn't say anything about it. :/ )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "@bmckinney does this mean that the bibtex citation will be available via API?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "We should probably tag the cliquet-fxa version as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "IIRC we need to use memset, because an empty brace is not C99 comformant, and because we cannot use `{0}` because how the struct is organized is not defined in POSIX (the initializer cannot be `{0}` if the first property of the struct is a struct)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `pods` table.", + "reference": "Will we be adding this to `AppliedTo` as well? If not, any reason why not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Just a note that this feels weird being on the base NVDAObject rather than IAccessible, but right now, I understand that's how it has to be because we fire MSAA caret events on the focus object regardless of whether it's IAccessible. I think we should consider restricting these caret events to focus objects that are IAccessible subclasses in future, but that change is probably too risky for this PR. CC @MichaelDCurran for his thoughts." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `PaymentEditFormType` class.", + "reference": "This change and other similar ones should not be part of this commit. This commit is about adding a ImageUploadType not fixing controllers and stuff." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should shard as needed.", + "reference": "I am a bit confused about PING here. Ping is implied and it overlaps with \"$SYS.REQ.ACCOUNT.%s.%s\" where the last token is what is requested (CONNZ) and the one before is the requested account id." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: use the OptSubFolder constants. Also in the client you are using \"maxdepth\" but in the server the constant for \"depth\" is being used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "I also moved this to `/verdaccio/storage` since it's written in runtime, and the approach here is to make the configuration by default read-only." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's worth it, but I think it's worth it.", + "reference": "nit: s/has cancel method/has a cancel method" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Useless assignment to variable - `second_quiz`. Use `_` or `_second_quiz` as a variable name to indicate that it won't be used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this still needed since there's the `GzipPrecompressed` type?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to add a `_NumgoriesNotSpecified` method to the `_NumgoriesNotSpecified` class.", + "reference": "this is spelled wrong and also not used so remove it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "It might be right here that's the issue ^" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `@Deprecated`", + "reference": "@danieldietrich let's leave existing extension. Here we just mark `keyComparator()` with `@Deprecated` annotation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This breaks CI. I am not sure why you need to include io.h in this file especially on linux." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "this seems equivalent" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "change size to 50MB criticial, 10MB warn... change count to 50k critical, 5k warn..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to remove all refinements for shard.", + "reference": "This has nothing to do with master/slave replication. Is this something we want to change too? If so, I guess this is an aggregation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "We don't use Process.waitpid here as it was causing bisects to", + "reference": "Maybe it makes sense to mention that those zombies are not forever, but only up to the moment when the parent process exits? Is that correct according to your observations, @benoittgt? Please disregard this note if zombies remain after." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the mock to the start_moto_server function.", + "reference": "moto mock setup needs to happen before boto usage." + }, + { + "prediction": "`first_metric_only` and `feval` are not available at the same time.", + "reference": "`hasattr(cb, 'first_metric_only') and cb.first_metric_only` -> `getattr(cb, 'first_metric_only', False)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "no newline for function" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a bug?", + "reference": "This makes me feel icky. We could also go the route of making `wlr_output.scale` a double instead of a float, but that would be a more widely reaching change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `NULL`", + "reference": "Again, would be awesome if you could remove the tabs in these 3-4 lines as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move move", + "reference": "You're moving multiple times from `step.name`; you're not allowed to do that. Instead you have to copy the `step.name` string and (if you want to) move once at the very last." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))(((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE", + "reference": "What about `may not end`? @jancborchardt" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "If you think about it, the status should be PermissionDenied?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Calculation looks good but don't know what format etc grafana expects this to be in." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: We could use the `to_str(..)` util here. (let's not bother changing for this PR.. )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Can you rename alias to `executiongenpb`. The rule is package+\"pb\" for `temporal-proto` and package+\"genpb\" for server protos." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Any noticeable performance hit? Any other way to avoid the allocation and copy even of the array?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "What if you remove this line entirely from here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`on_lateral` can also be implemented" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Please add a space between `if` and `(`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "This statuses might have been better off with some custom status type. However, good for now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Thanks for catching the bug. Here your change lets `v4IPNet` and `v6IPNet` take the first IPv4/IPv6 address in `addrList`. Maybe choose the last one also works and makes code simpler? What's your idea? @tnqn" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "nitpick: you can name this variable just `details`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "The character class in the regex should probably be \"[a-zA-Z0-9_]\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this setting.", + "reference": "Please also increment `Settings.VERSION` and update `AccountSettings`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think this should just say \"build \". And when builddate wasn't set, e.g. somebody built weave with 'go build' or some other way, this should return \"unknown\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Can we move this into a separate var and call it `desc` like below?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new line.", + "reference": "why RpcSchema need this annotations?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to delete the WC entry if it's nil.", + "reference": "Not sure it makes sense to send the reply if we did not delete from the map, but I guess it does not hurt.." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "Most of these variables can be moved after `return` or to the body of `if` statement." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.", + "reference": "nit: Is this actually just a http \"unauthorised\" response? Or is that too vague? If this is the right way to go... is \"token\" the right word\" Or do we want to say something else?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We check for `$future` in PuppetDB::Config, so this won't change behavior if you don't have `future` set." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should raise a KeyError.", + "reference": "I think you should remove `if isinstance(by, str):`,. We also should fix the error message `raise ValueError('Not a valid index: TODO')` to match with pandas'" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to do that.", + "reference": "Curious - do we want this to be `OTel.GrpcHandler.Request`? For example, if someone is debugging a crash dump, they would get some hint that it was added by OpenTelemetry." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `CommitStateUnknownException`. This is important because downstream users of this API need to clean up the commit or not, if the state is unknown then it is not safe to remove any files. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. This is important because downstream users of this API need to clean up the commit or not, if the state is unknown then it is not safe to remove any files. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed. All other exceptions will be treated as if the commit has failed.", + "reference": "nit: unnecessary `

    `" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Should just be `#ifdef ADIOS2_HAVE_HDF5`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to use the same function name. I don't think that's a good idea, but I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "FYI: I deployed a stack with multiple lengths for the stack name and resource id to cloudformation, to see how it truncates the parts for the final FunctionName" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the path here. I don't think we should change the path here.", + "reference": "Did we not use this field @_@" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "shouldn't this be `android_keystore_name`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Double check the issuers package too :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `_visit_consumer` and `_check_consumer`", + "reference": "This is out of date right? Now that `_is_first_level_self_reference` uses it as well? Perhaps we should make the docstring more general and not refer to method names that could change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This test alone takes around 10-12 minutes to run. It has 20 subtests each of which takes around one minute. We should see if we there are redundant subtests that we can remove, or look for a way to optimize them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "Good call, we need to keep that check :+1:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `ParseRequestLine` method.", + "reference": "Should the interface have 2 `ParseHeaders` methods?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to have a constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int int", + "reference": "Nit: Does this make more sense as `iceberg.hive.metadata...`? The rest of the configs seem to start with `iceberg.hive`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is `baseURL` not required?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is right?", + "reference": "Just delete it, `embedding_rpn_head` is not a `Detector` which should have `show_result`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Where do we _get_ tag values? edit: I mean, where are these `GetFoo()` methods called from? It just seems weird to me that we are getting tag values from spans. I thought we only ever _set_ tags on spans." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.", + "reference": "This seems like log spam. Maybe expose the encoding as a method and log at the point of interest?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I looked up that one, and it seems correct: Authentification is French, Authentication seems to be correct" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `except` block, not a `except` block.", + "reference": "Can we print a more human-friendly warning here, saying that plotting won't work or something along those lines?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import this from mitmproxy to mitmproxy.", + "reference": "@mhils didn't we try to get rid of these (now empty) wrapper classes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I would avoid importing `felix/ipsets` package because this package is the windows equivalent and should be at the same level of `felix/ipsets`. We could add linux specific dependencies into `felix/ipsets` later and it will break Windows build." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Table` interface.", + "reference": "Maybe, `import` would be a better name." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to \"max_results\"", + "reference": "Wouldn't we want `PARAMETER_MAX_RESULTS` in here as well? (I might be miunderstanding how this is used)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "We can re-use the config in our tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Wouldn't we have the same issue with the internal libevent? IIRC, the integration is pretty close to an exact duplicate. Or does the libevent m4 code already take that into account when setting this variable? PMIx _requires_ libevent, so it isn't like pmix_libevent_support can be anything other than 1. I'm okay with leaving this question for separate resolution - just wondering why we don't have the same issue here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The actual User-Agent string uses \"CriOS\" not \"CRiOS\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this interface.", + "reference": "Unused code deletion. Is that a desired thing? No implementation of this actually used this indexer, so removing it seemed reasonable (and was suggested by the compiler). Maybe this had an indexer so plugins could use it? This change is definitely pushing the limits of what is appropriate in a \"cleanup\" as it is changing public API surface area." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We'd lose the data here from the original teardown_exception and only get the dump_exception - I fear that that could make the actual error difficult to track if it cascades." + }, + { + "prediction": "should be a boolean)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))setsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetset", + "reference": "At this point in `diff()` we should know if we're dealing with a `component` or a native `html` element. We can reuse that information in this if-statement here :+1:" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))", + "reference": "somewhere in reward protocol, we need to do if epoch is Fairbank { a.foundationBonusP2StartEpoch = genesis.xxx a.foundationBonusP2EndEpoch = genesis.yyy p.state(sm, adminKey, &a) } that is to write the 2 new values at Fairbank height then this logic can follow" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should drop the CloudAssetStore table.", + "reference": "Dropping and recreating would delete all t he previous records, are they any important?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "While it is technically OK to use `m.GetPaths()` here, and it's a mock code so it doesn't really matter, I'd still like to have `m.Path(\"devices\")` used here, because since commit 714c91e9f73a1512808476eb532b4aa36bbb7530 we're not supposed to use GetPaths() for anything other than state save/restore." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in the `buildImage` method, not in the `buildImage` method.", + "reference": "Let's be consistent everywhere: either \"Disable\"/\"Enable\" or \"Disabled\"/\"Enabled\". I'm voting for the latter.:)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "this works and is the smallest possible change but we could definitely fail earlier" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Should not have snuck in here right? This is a golang 1.17 feature, wii definitely want to update these" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `NotesScreenComponent` class. I don't think we should move this to the `NotesScreenComponent` class. I don't think we should move this to the `NotesScreenComponent` class. I don't think we should move this to the `NotesScreenComponent` class. I don't think we should move this to the `NotesScreenComponent` class. I don't think we should move this to the `NotesScreenComponent` class.", + "reference": "Could you explain the logic with prevFolderId?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please add license header" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It bothers me that the user calls `initialize` without also calling `finalize`. It seems to me that we're essentially making `lbann_comm` a singleton object. Going further down this path, we would put `initialize` inside `lbann_comm`'s constructor and `finalize` in the destructor. This has it's own weirdness - the user must make sure it's lifespan matches the beginning and end of the program. We may also run into the case where someone might want multiple instances of `lbann_comm`, but this is not too important." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "We should probably make a unique_ptr typedef in ROMol.h and start using that liberally." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Can you add missing asterisk?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into a new class.", + "reference": "late to the party, but I bet it meant to be `capitalizeLettersAfterNumbers` :)" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "The Activity is recreated on configuration changes and the value of the field is lost. So, e.g. pressing'send' once will display the error message. If you rotate the device and press'send' again, the message will show another time. Use `onSaveInstanceState()` and `onRetainInstanceState()` to save and restore the value of the field." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to pass special info that we may need while applying the new options. I don't think we should pass special info that we may need while applying the new options.", + "reference": "Looks like a \"find and replace\" unintended change here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "haven't we got rid off `randomSP` recently? (I think `not learn` implied that)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Why we need use `in.GetStatus()` function here? Can we use `in.Status.xxxx` directly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "@cretz Just a thought: what if another renewal process updates the certificate between the beginning of this for loop (above on line 67) and actually calling RenewCert? Even though we have a read lock on the certCache, something else could have renewed it by now, and finished, which would cause this certificate to be renewed twice. Could you double-check my thinking here and see if that's a plausible 'race' condition? I wonder if the lock needs to be put over this whole function. (It's still early here; I could be wrong...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a", + "reference": "We don't need this for the PInvoke?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "nits, I think add a log (using s.logger) to show why does this return with no error is better." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Btw, It would be nice if we have some tests for those validation functions." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Should this be called something that indicates its function, rather than its content? validationMessagePrefix, or similar?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.", + "reference": "Please remove this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "You could change the name of the command line switch too. Short options are typically one character after hyphen. wxWidgets' command line parser seems to handle `-nd` without confusing it with `-n` or `-d` but I'm not sure if that's by design or by accident. I'd remove the short option. `--no-daemon` is with hyphen but the rest of Manager and client uses underscore. Please change that." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "Why are we mentioning toybox in this message? AND it still says \"tdnf error\". What's the actual error? Should it be resolved instead of flagged?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `MongoStreamClosedError` instead of a `MongoStreamClosedError`.", + "reference": "You can remove these if they've been resolved in NODE-3405 and this isn't depending on it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "don't need the class here if its empty" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to AppointmentIndexRoute.", + "reference": "This should be computed('i18n.locale'...." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should raise a BigQueryExecutionError.", + "reference": "Please add return and return type description to docstring of this method." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/", + "reference": "What does 1 << 32 do? In irb typing this yields 4294967296. I didn't find the append operator in Numeric or Integer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "We generally use metadata for this sort of thing, indeed there is a `metadata[:execution_result]`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This was very confusing until I realized this might refer to the *bokeh* use of the word'streaming'." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you rename this as `tasksToContainerStates`? If you do that, you can rename the lock as well" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not null?", + "reference": "Fixing `lint` warnings that have existed for a while." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it is a good choice.", + "reference": "An iterator **of {\\@code n} sequential elements,** where each element ~are~ **is the** given {\\@code element}." + }, + { + "prediction": "Why not just use the name of the integrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegrationId.AdoNetIntegration", + "reference": "If all of the `SqlCommandIntegrationName` values are the same, can we just remove it from `IAdoNetClientData` entirely and put the constant there?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe regroup this import with the other cert-manager packages." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "There are spaces missing ;) Just have a look at the code style of the `if` statement above" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We should pass the size limit as a parameter to Drain so that we don't take messages out of the pool and then drop them. It's ok to merge as is, I will file an issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((( code code code code code code code code code code code code code code code code code code. code block code block code block code block code block code block code", + "reference": "Patch lists are used in many places so this is going to break other updates. This should just be a local change in emit_special_ibl_xfer() to pass the second-to-last instruction instead of the last instruction." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "@argakiig previous work was above live threshold, causing the high difficulty to bleed into other blocks when genesis open was processed in tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this migration.", + "reference": "Metrics/LineLength: Line is too long. [89/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the HidepidDisable flag here.", + "reference": "Please also extend the config tests now to include the new field." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "I think it's wise to keep the behavior backwards-compatible (so `false` as default)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We don't need this line, do we?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "I don't know if we've actually had this problem on Upcase. I'd lean towards having a blank file unless (like on robots) we see multiple errors per week from this crawler." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm not good at picking colors, if anyone else has a preference." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Note that even if you cancel the timer, the refreshFolders function might still be running since it's async. Could that be a problem for the test units? One big issue I had with tests is they sometimes would work and sometimes fail randomly, and that's because there are still code running in the background. One example was the ItemChange class, which saves data asynchronously. So I've implemented a waitForAllSaved(), which can be used for test units, to make sure nothing is running once the test ends. So just wondering if we might end up with this issue here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "can we make this something more descriptive? like... types should compile? I'm still not sure exactly what this is testing... this says \"Exported types\" - but what does tsd actually look at?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "this method is need for full screen video button to appear in players" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why is this a pointer?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a new method. I don't think we should move this into a method.", + "reference": "nit: Space after comma" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "A similar field is already define in `scapy/layers/bluetooth.py`. Can you merge both definitions?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`std::strtok` isn't necessary. The `std::string::find_first_of` is better C++ alternative to `std::strtok`. For example, see `CheckedError Parser::ParseEnumFromString` method." + }, + { + "prediction": "Why is this removed?", + "reference": "This property is already declared in a parent with the same visibility/type/value. This one is redundant." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "This is required, otherwise multiprocessing will (for some reason) crash" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please put in a separate line-separated block" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be printed.", + "reference": "Should error be eaten? If so, not clear why" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This attribute is not defined if the condition is not met. Instead, you could define another RouteFactory (e.g. `BucketRouteFactory` with a class attribute like `allow_empty_list`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `ClusterDeployment.Status.InstalledTimestamp`. I don't think we should add this to the `ClusterDeployment.Status.InstalledTimestamp`.", + "reference": "Can we use the existing `InstalledTimestamp` function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "weird naming: `is` but `fields` (plural or singular?). If the method checks if the fragment has an invalid value, then \"hasInvalidValue\" or \"containsInvalidValue\" is fine no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Does this mean that `listenbrainz.org/user/iliekcomputers` will start getting 404s?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [82/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to True.", + "reference": "That's a strange name =)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.", + "reference": "Thoughts on this? I'm not crazy about the brittleness of this but haven't found a good way to test more generically that a specific (custom) template has been rendered." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `subscribe` method. I don't think we should add this to the `subscribe` method. I think we should add the `subscribe` method to the `subscribe` method.", + "reference": "Have we reached binding-level agreement on the `subscribe` terminology? My only concern is that it doesn't seem descriptive enough and may be confused with subscribing for notifications." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a link to the span context. I don't think we should add a link to the span context. I don't think we should add a link to the span context. I don't think we should add a link to the span context. I don't think we should add a link to the span context. I don't think we should add a link to the span context, but I don't think we should add a link to the span context.", + "reference": "would it not be safer to move this condition to the `addLink` method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think this might read better: > some apps need the response headers before starting to stream content with http2, so it's important to explicitly flush the headers to the client before streaming the data." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to return the partition data for the file of this task. I don't think we should return the partition data for the file of this task. I don't think we should return the partition data for the file of this task. If we want to return the partition data for the file of this task, we should return the partition data for the file of this task.", + "reference": "What does this return if there is no partition? I think that we should consider adding a struct type that describes this tuple. That way, we can use an empty struct for unpartitioned and a non-empty struct for tasks that are combined by partition. We could also support more combinations, like combining across day partitions by not across bucket partitions or similar." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Also, it might be worth returning this for the above lookup on `kbfsRepoDir` as well, which could happen if someone tries to delete a repo in a TLF that has never had any repos at all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this flag is a good option.", + "reference": "Can this be `Hidden: true` as we already have a bunch of flags that are printed on `--help` and this seems like an average person should not care about it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Wouldn't this set $strictVariables = true when Config::get returns false?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "was this meant to be checked in?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "check spaces after const name..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "If the GPU setting is enabled, resourceFields.NvidiaGPUManager will be nil, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "We should probably verify that it's readable too" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "See, here's an example where you removed the variable but kept the call, which makes sense." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please use `request.getTitle()` instead of `feed.getHumanReadableIdentifier()`: In this case, `feed` does not have a human readable title yet" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need to log the error, but I'm not sure why we need to log the error. I think we should log the error and log the error.", + "reference": "I think the wording on the left is better" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Please update the method described to point out that it maintains a chain of interceptors and they will be called in the same order passed in the options." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should not be a problem.", + "reference": "Is this case purely hypothetical or did it solve an issue that occurred in your testing? I'm trying to understand this change a little better" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Use instead `convert.Int32ToString` that was added in #762 for this purpose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "If key is present, tree.put(k,v) needs to return a new instance for Maps and the same instance for Sets. Therefore we currently perform an additional 'contains' check for Sets. A future optimization may add an additional flag `replace` to the backing HAMT.put() / RedBlackTree.insert() methods. Sets set it to replace=false, Maps set it to replace=true. But for now this solution is working for us." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This is a regression test for code I found while working on this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I'm wondering if we need to delete jsonStr and jsonAttr after the json_extract_path_text call to avoid unnecessary heap pressure. Though if json_extract_path_text itself does new's on the same heap, we'd get heap fragmentation. Another approach would be to allocate these on the stack instead, avoiding both concerns: char jsonStr[len1+1]; char jsonAttr[len2+1];..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `int(request.args.get('from', 0))`", + "reference": "Does it come as `str`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(setsetset(setsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetset", + "reference": "This should actually read as the following `for (int i = 0; i < allergens.size(); i++)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is so useful and safety, I want to propose making AppendBool, AppendInt, etc. all private functions, and forcing us to use AppendValue(j, values.New(false)), etc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Really, really small nit I believe there's 3x tabs in here? And should it be just 2x?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Perhaps note that rclone can't do this yet?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "You probably don't need to set an empty config here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think you are missing `cftime.DatetimeAllLeap` here. That said, all of these are subclasses of `cftime.datetime`, so I think you could get away with just using `cftime.datetime` here, rather than enumerating all of the different subclasses (since `cftime_types` is only used for instance checks)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "don't we need to set this label on pool pods? I don't see them being set" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this error error error error error error::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "can remove, it isn't reachable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "`expect(cancellation).to be_can_downgrade_instead` would be preferred :rainbow: :rainbow:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `if (result.IsCancelled) {` if (result.IsCancelled) { break; } else { break; }", + "reference": "Gross. The OS should timeout writes for completely unresponsive clients to begin with. Long term, the better solution is to enforce a minimum minimum data rate for responses. This might require a way to cancel LibuvAwaitables, but it definitely not OK to immediately kill the socket and any ongoing writes just because the request processing loop completed. You could consider doing that after some kind of timeout, but at that point you might as well just enforce a minimum rate." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "If this is not used, we should just delete the line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Are there other callers to this function. How will they be impacted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Let's be consistent. The majority of boto code does not use relative imports. Let's just stick to the existing standard of \"from boto.package.subpackage import Thing\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "Suggestion: specify `arity` for this option." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "This is a parameter available for the matplotlib backend IIRC. In which case, it is good to see this support added to the Bokeh backend." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "trim has performance impact and this is the lowest level library... seems the trim if occurs should happen in the UI or Query controller instead.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Probably also needed for the `http.client.FOUND` below?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Can you also add this to Compiler.md?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "!numbers -> numbers" + }, + { + "prediction": "This method assumes the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here. This works for both existing libraries and the baseline test. We will need to adjust this if in the future there are libraries that do not follow the package name format assumed here.", + "reference": "This description doesn't seem quite right for the longrunning case - `longrunning` isn't an orgname." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.", + "reference": "maybe give it a more descriptive name, e.g. `competitiveFilter`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the keys to a master list if we don't want to add the keys to a master list.", + "reference": "This occurrence of \"master\" is unrelated to master/slave replication. Maybe simply remove the word \"master\" or replace it with \"reference\" but \"primary\" doesn't really make sense." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the file. I don't think we should add this to the file.", + "reference": "BLOCKING: This is a problem. We shouldn't be introducing new dependencies on proofs into actors. The miner has some dependencies that should be removed (#2555). This could be accomplished either by moving `proofs.Mode` to `types.ProofsMode` or by forgoing a new type altogether and replacing it with a boolean. The later would have the additional advantage of reducing the number of types we have to export through ABI. I get why `proofs.Mode` has value as a type over a boolean, but I'm not sure it's worth it here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "We probably want to log the fact that a `MessageId` was not present in the response. In addition the `RequestID` from `request.Request` should be included in the message so that the user is aware of the issue." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into a separate file.", + "reference": "It feels a bit strange to re-assign that here, as that line itself has no context on why it's reassigned. I'd prefer if we could pass `{ propertyID: webPropertyId }` below instead (that's how we do that elsewhere too). This also applies to other similar re-assignments below - let's rather pass the values within the objects as applicable, since then there is more clear context on why this \"rename\" / \"reassignment\" is necessary (because of an object expecting specific properties)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `views.js` file.", + "reference": "remove this in the new pr aswell when moving compare to plugins as discussed." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "check varHolder is nullptr is redundant, ExecutionContext ensure" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Make these frozen constants?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "Please use something like html.escape() to ensure that the text is totally safe to include within html. < is not enough." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "why is a buffered channel larger than 1 needed here? the separate goroutines can just try to write to the channel with a select-default block, and then it is not needed. i find the current implementation a bit convoluted, maybe we could simplify it a bit? not sure why it is needed for example to communicate an empty result. these patterns can be simplified using waitgroups" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this file, but I don't think we should change this file.", + "reference": "There seem to be more changes in here than I'd expect (mostly `limit: 255` additions)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "I'm not sure, but I think it's `Tenant`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Not sure if it's an issue, but this is a breaking change in a public API. Maybe we should add as an overload without optional parameter instead and delegate the existing call to this one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "as opposed to exposing the chooser function and increasing our API exposure for the purpose of tests, can we move the HTTP transport config test into this package?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "This is using the legacy DRM interface. DPMS levels have been removed from the atomic interface IIRC. Should we handle DPMS levels at all?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think this was correct before. The nonce passed in here is the nonce at a block (which is the next nonce not yet used, e.g. 0 if the account was never used, 1 if only the tx with nonce 0 has been sent). So if the in-block nonce is 12, then a transaction with nonce 12 cannot have been included yet." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Please name the file ShareExtension.js, as you import it under this name (also could you convert it to TypeScript please?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.", + "reference": "Not sure if we need it, but if we set it, be sure to add `,omitempty`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "It's the whole `PublicHeader` that will change soon, and we should state that here, not in the member functions. If Jana's proposal for a new header is accepted, we might also want to rename the fields here. For example, there won't be a dedicated version flag anymore, so a more appropriate name might be `ContainsVersion` instead of `VersionFlag`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I think `element` can stay of type `Character` because `Character` is a final class. The we do not need the cast in the line below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Not sure, if we should do it the other way round. If you ask be in the middle of the night, whether Interface should return true as \"isInterface\" and what Annotation would return. I'd tell you, Annotations should return false.... I want to say, on first glance, I'd say, it's easier to have \"isInterface\" and \"isAnnotation\" rather than \"isInterface\", \"isAnnotation\" and \"isRegularInterface\"... But I see, we also have \"isRegularClass\".... We still have the possibility to change the semantics of those APIs in PMD 7 *Update:* Or in other words: What is less surprising? That isInterface returns true for annotations or that it returns false?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This will potentially skip package results. Do we really want that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please remove `HIP_UNSUPPORTED`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "if this is a \"Status\" type then the variable name \"Stats\" (which implies \"statistics\") seems wrong (or at least confusing to me)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "maybe will be better to put it into the default worker's config rather than hardcoding the address?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.", + "reference": "It seems like this is not meant to test the option failure, but rather that `raw` can be set. This may be a superfluous test now, and we might want to delete it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This is already done by `view_set_fullscreen`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "mmm I followed the convention of this collection. It has Add, Remove, RemoveAll, so All sounds reasonable. Else It would likely be AddPeer, RemovePeer, RemovePeers and Peers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "_nitpick_ I'm thinking about whether this method should be in the previous commit or not. I know it's not yet used there, but in theory, neither do UUID itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "\"break\" is right? You skip the line 768." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can this use the route helper instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "Why is this field exported and others aren't?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "should we rename this like `mongodb_srv_tests.js`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the pageTitle here.", + "reference": "This should still have a value when there is no page title, e.g. just `__( 'Search Traffic Summary', 'google-site-kit' )`." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Oops.. meant to link to SplitOp here. I'll clean up in my next commit" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Remove these unnecessary imports that you've added." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `url_type`", + "reference": "That space shouldn't be here :wink: This lead to an exception whenever a page with an error was loaded, e.g. an inexistent host - I just fixed that :smile:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "It seems this is not the way to fix issue #505." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Please take a look at the docstring of `F.binary_cross_entropy_with_logits`. `weight` should be a tensor that matches the input tensor shape. It is Not the class-aware weight. `pos_weight` should be a vector with a length equal to the number of classes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Same here, merge with an existing test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "@aimanrosli23 Could you help to confirm if you do not revert the change in below commit: SHA-1: 643623147a1feaddd734ddd84604e1d8e9dcebee * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Send SEND_STATUS at lower frequency" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Can we do this without a breaking API change? What about adding a different name to convert directly to a Schema?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why do we need to pull bluebird in here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FlowPreparer` class.", + "reference": "If *two* threads successfully download the same project into two different temp dirs, and one of them successfully renames one to its final destination, the `if`on line 102 will be false _in the other thread_, and it would leave its temp dir behind." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((()))))(((((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "I would appreciate it if you could rename `link` to `all_link` so that the roles of the two links (the other is `target_link`) become clearer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is there a reason not to use `smi.create_expectedIndex` here (and in other places)? The `smi.create_expectedIndex` function will also check to make sure that you don't accidentally skip or duplicate any indexes. With the goal of avoiding errors in the test. It does mean that you have to be diligent with how the expected indexes are created, which can be annoying too. My logic was that it is better to be annoyed by constraints during development time than to find out some time later that the test didn't do what I thought." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the description here.", + "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't know if we even need this parameter." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "What is the new result of this file if we keep it the same than before? It's just to picture easily what changed in this MR :) (thinking is hard)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This needs to be synchronous for the timeout to work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have any questions or concerns. I don't think we should have any questions or concerns.", + "reference": "Can you break this onto multiple lines?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "OK, it looks like all children have bit 4 set, but it doesn't really matter at this split point: just informative, nothing reads it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value here. I think we should have a default value here.", + "reference": "Sorry for the very basic question but why do we still have a DNSZone CRD in light of the DNSEndpoint, I don't fully understand the differences." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "Looks like loop with overhead. You can: - create SID - test private function `sessionIsUnique()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "In my opinion, it would be better to have two separate settings. One that stores if sorting is enabled and one that stores the order. That allows to toggle automatic sort without having to re-select the order." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "/me can't wait to rename this repo :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "nit: maybe call these `loadCollection()/loadDb()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "Did you consider just do `return Task is an external data dependency and data does not exist (yet?).'`? Less `None`'s and `ifs`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]", + "reference": "Some day, we really need to make these toolbars pluggable.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "This should be `pygment=False` like in `browsertab.py`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the new client to the list of clients.", + "reference": "Should this be moved down (or up) to under the client lock instead of server lock?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Why are we removing this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What do you think about using `self.id`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "Please log once here at Error level \"Failed to connect to Typha, will retry...\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to use it.", + "reference": "Can you revert this change? The `VERSION` value will be updated after maintainer determines the version at release." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "It could be better if we use the up case letter to specify the constant string name. Such as QUALIFIED_SERVICE_NAME_KEY can let the user know it's a constant string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should be `@configuration.failure_exit_code`, we don't want to hard code 1." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Changed per review in Blockly." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Hi @wenyingd. so what's the original dst MAC of the reply packet from kube-proxy?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list of qualified class names to ignore when counting public methods (see R0903)", + "reference": "Note: I wasn't sure what the right wording would be for this, so I used existing language from elsewhere in the codebase." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the config file.", + "reference": "Docstring for `platform`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This should be called before any `os.Exit` otherwise it could still mess up things." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "shouldn't this be `short`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Can you please paste the output of `volume list` command which will show capacity of a openebs volume." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should add a check for name already registered or metric variable is already registered or metric variable is already registered or metric variable is already already registered or metric variable is already already registered.", + "reference": "I'd make this a `throw new NullPointerException(\"metric == null\");` instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ScriptingEnvironment.h` file, so that we don't have to include the `ScriptingEnvironment.h` file.", + "reference": "Include should be order lexicographically." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "We need to pass in the Activity context here, so that LoginActivity is used, and so that LoginActivity can get onActivityResult from the PasscodeActivity. Without this, the application context is used, and we don't get a callback when the passcode is done." + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80", + "reference": "Can you move these to the top please, for consistency with other models - normally we put scopes immediately after the associations at the top of the model. As to names I agree with @gravitystorm that these names may be confusing but I'm not sure the ones I suggested are perfect either so I'm not really sure what's best. The goal of my names was just to separate point which could be ordered (as `ordered`) from those which can't (as `unordered`) but I realise that may not be very clear from the names." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should keep it in the future.", + "reference": "Looks like the episode should also not be deleted when repeating" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I feel like goimports would move this import line by the other non-std packages... can you double-check that? Run goimports or set up your editor to run it on save. :+1:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "`options['binary'] = WebDriver::Chrome.path` if set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Nit: Supported -> Enabled." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to 42", + "reference": "Yay! I was too lazy to fix this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "other declaration of errors (from `typecheck`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message to say \"value must not be a string\" instead of \"value must not be a string\"", + "reference": "nit: error starts with capital letter" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this flag.", + "reference": "the original code ignores \\Draft and \\Recent, whereas your change will not. what this matters, i'm not sure." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why was this necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can you also do this for Cover?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ValidateImageSubresourceRange` method.", + "reference": "So I tried adding this VU a long time ago, thought it would be this simple of a check, but turns out there were other validation in the way for getting here in `ValidateImageAspectMask` I assume that is what is failing CI here, realized it would require some more refactoring" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This method is not needed for postgresql, by default sum function omits null values so we can remove this file" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you provide a `--with-systemdsystemgeneratordir` option here? So that I can do unprivileged installs without completely turning off systemd. I can add it as a follow-up PR too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`classification` is misspelled" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Can you change this to `sampleInitCode`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.", + "reference": "I added a startTs information in `TiDagRequest` output. Not really sure if it is useful? @zhexuany" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "This prevents margin/border/padding CSS from affecting the width/height (otherwise in Chrome a width and height of 1 would result in a rect size of 5x5)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "prefer to just add this to the `verify_authorized` exception list above since we're already making exceptions." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "was there a reason to not loop over parent classes here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "@billybonks Why move `import Ember from 'ember';` to the top?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `WorkflowModel` model.", + "reference": "Everything's so simple (a `ThreeStateWorkflow`) until it isn't :smirk:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "I don't quite understand where the NaNs come from..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to 2 * time.Second.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I wonder if we should look at moving the Python stuff to a plugin and doing this there rather than adding to core plz at this point?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This is the actual bug fix. I prob should have broken this out into two PRs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the core.cs file.", + "reference": "I am not sure if we need this, we already have DifficultyBombDelays" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I think it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I think it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "move to finally - I can see at least one return that would omit it, also any exception and so on" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "remove `genesisConfig.GravityChainStartHeight == 0`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Doctrine\\Common\\Core\\Core\\Core\\Core\\Core\\Core\\Core\\Core\\CoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCore.CoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCoreCore", + "reference": "this might kill whole application if `var-dumper` will not be installed. What about two separate file_exists conditions (monorepo/project)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Hrm. Maybe this isn't the correct spot to run this? Because it errors if the app type doesn't support settings. But we want to check that before running it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why are you changing this name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by by", + "reference": "as we discussed, maybe it would be better to - [ ] set OVERRIDE_IN_DOCKER=1 in the Dockerfile - [ ] replace the if statement with `os.path.exists(\"/run/.containerenv\")` as @dfangl suggested" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I like this style of doing things better than having super big conditional without explanation. Even though I know this won't be re-used it's nice to have a function if only for clarity." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Our preference here is to either have inline statements e.g. `@group_level -= 1 if @group_level > 0` but stylistically here I think `return @group_level if @group_level == 0` might be nicer. As it stands however our rubocop is picking this up as a fail :(" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Spark3 Is supported in OSS Iceberg, Do you mean this particular function is not supported in Spark3? If so I think we should have a more clear reason why" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "something about the arbitrary file access part here makes me nervous. Can we keep the `if not path.endswith(\".ipynb\")` check from before here as well? Just imagining a weird attack scenario where somebody somehow uses this to get access to confidental files or something" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `search_params_logic` method in the `search_params_logic` class.", + "reference": "I wonder if we should push this and the search_params_logic into the blacklight config." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "don't need this line, since it is not tested here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I wonder if adding this new param in the middle of the param list might screw up some existing code that is depending on the old parameter order. Might be better to add it to the end of the parameter list?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I wonder if this absolute path is gonna affect the build-cache relocatability of these compile tasks??" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "possible bug if `fullResponse` is false" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nitpick: Please only `import string` here and use `string.ascii_lowercase` - I really like to see what module stuff is coming from without looking at the imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "nitpick: the only reason we have a catch for every one of these promises is because the test isn't properly chaining promises (returning them within each `then`). We could reduce the `catch` with `console.dir` to a single instance if that was done" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "why do this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.", + "reference": "For consistency, would it not be best to also replace the first class name? `traceLog('Class '. static::class.'has been deprecated, use '. SystemMediaLibrary::class.'instead.')`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `prometheus.io/docs/prometheus/latest/querying/api/#tsdb-admin-apis`.", + "reference": "this should be `EnabledAdminAPI` and the json string should then be `enableAdminAPI`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this import is necessary.", + "reference": "Noticed some missing imports in manage.py so thought I'd add them" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC(LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "as a future improvement, maybe we should just change `ForAllFlowRecordsDo` so that `updateOrSendFlowRecord` uses a flow record pointer instead of a copy of stored flow record. This whole code is executed with the lock any way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "I am not sure what GitHub wants to tell me with this icon here :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "can we also check for smaller zoom levels returning valid error codes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `LogVerbose` instead of `LogVerbose`.", + "reference": "1) These names are not great, doesn't help explain what they do. 2) Instead of methods like this that hard code some number of = and *, why not a method that takes the string, defaults to a char to surround with, and a width? 3) Do we really even need headers like this in the output? Maybe we ditch them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this test.", + "reference": "The autocomplete editor shouldn't change its own behavior, I assume that `autoWrapCol` and `autoWrapRow` options should be set to `false` in handsontable editor." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "out of curiosity, with IPv6 introduced, why there's no change to the expected output of openflow in the test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: grammar: instruction" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We can revert this to reduce the diff of the PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new controller to mgr with r as the reconcile.", + "reference": "i think this missed the reconciler to callsite change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "Please reuse `getClientConfigPath`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Should we use the shared chai-addon.js file here? Actually we should consolidate any `chai.use` calls, I see 20 instances, quick win?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `` or a `` or a ``? I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe move _agreedCapabilities and _availableCapabilities from List to SortedSet? We could order them by code and then by version already." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I see the `+1` issue, but we used to check if `o.lss!= nil` and we don't anymore, so we are sure that it won't be nil here, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "why is the `send` needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is this necessary? If so, we need to update the docstring." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Checking for actionable here instead of grabbing the first pending approval. I tested this with proposal ID 265 on staging." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I made this change because I wasn't getting printouts of the'result' value when the assert was inlined for some reason. I think it's related to creating new CallbackCheckers maybe?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this. I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.", + "reference": "nit: the correct name is \"request line\", so let's use the right one here :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This should now use `[]`, so it crashes if the var is missing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in the CALI_BPF_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_INLINE_IN_INLINE_IN_INLINE_IN_INLINE_IN_INLINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_IN_LINE_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_LINEIN_IN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_LINEIN_", + "reference": "you could use `bpf_map_update_elem` with `BPF_EXIST`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "thanks for noticing this! But I think we should not have it in this PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "A few things: - This may not serialize because I think the property for the sequence number on an input is `.sequenceNumber`. - There should be tests to cover these statements - Indentation is incorrect (should be two spaces, as similar to the statements above)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an error if data_format is not supported.", + "reference": "If this is a base method that could be used by others, should you hardcode 'GCS uploader' here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.", + "reference": "just a little thing: let's introduce a `final int bound = length - back.length();` that saves us calculating the bound each time checking the loop condition." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think that this should be a POST method, as it changes the state. Get requests should not change the state. With different method, I would suggest to have the handler under `\"/settlements/{peer}\"` path." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the L2GasPriceOracleAddress from the L2 predeploy contract?", + "reference": "This is the default value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "The spaces are actually legitimate here: in python, you: - first import standard library modules (hint: time is one) - then import 3rd party library modules - then import the modules from you project (here kinto). Between each block you need an empty line." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Haha, whoa, I'm not sure how I let that one go by. :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate commit.", + "reference": "FWIW: We have FileUtil.generateOriginalExtension for tabular files but it uses a hardcoded list rather than the properties file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value. I'm not sure if we should have a default value. I'm not sure if we should have a default value. I'm not sure if we should have a default value. I'm not sure if we should have a default value, but I'm not sure if we should have a default value.", + "reference": "I would consider extracting this logic in to a helper function to make it a bit more readable, but that's just my opinion." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Are all fields beginning with \"Debug\" automatically `;local`? (I guess so, but just checking.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a warning, not a warning.", + "reference": "We should let this module inherits from the EvalHook supported in MMCV, and only override the `__init__` function by adding the warnings. The other functions can use those in MMCV." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Let's use prepared statements here instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Just leaving this in one place but thanks so much for re-organising all these imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Ditto, here and below" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Let's move the check outside the `for`-loop so that we don't have to do it for every prop. If we change it to check for `vnode.type ==='string'` we can automatically skip checking text nodes which don't have props" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a hook to the `TablePlot` class.", + "reference": "Seems like the docstring here should simply be \"Deprecated; use `hooks` instead.\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "It would be nice to have an `attr` in `styles.xml` for this, so we don't need the same `if` statement in multiple places" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the index to the `teachers` table. I think it would be better to add an index to the `teachers` table and add the index to the `teachers` table. That way we don't have to add the index to the `teachers` table, and we don't have to add the index to the `teachers` table.", + "reference": "How about `null: false` on these two lines? Also `t.timestamps null: false`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not throw an exception if we don't have a met met met met met met met met", + "reference": "This recommendation isn't very helpful because it isn't clear what \"the metastore\" is. How about this instead: \"To fix this, use an alternative metastore\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "The `SymbolTable` deals only with symbols, I think we can just call this `isUsed` here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Please hide this behind a flag and add a setter function to the builder." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Just a side-node, no need to change it here: The term \"recent\" might be confusing at a later point in time." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "When can it be undefined? Wouldn't that be a bug?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "JMX offers normal APIs for this. I don't think you want the glassfish one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Could you remove `,' at the end?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `assert(typeof opt_port!== 'function', not port (mocha callback)));", + "reference": "Maybe it would simpler to ignore opt_port if type!== 'number'?" + }, + { + "prediction": "???)", + "reference": "do you want to rename the codec tag here too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "These command names are specific to Chromium-based browsers. Please move to `ChromiumDriverCommand`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Hm.. should we auto-patch? I am less sure on this yet as `percentile_approx` seems a Spark function and auto-patching it in Koalas seems a bit counterintuitive." + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to add a new test for this?", + "reference": "I found domain use in `AllFeedsTest::getAllFeedExportCreationData` and class AllFeedsTest is descendant of `FunctionalTestCase`. I think so we can rewrite this too.." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I am wondering if it is better to consolidate all committer checkpoint states into a single structure, e.g. Pojo class or Avro record which are Flink supported state types for schema evolution." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I assume this is a performance optimization to only check this once when creating the signal filter? While you're at it, maybe make `BLACKLIST` a set instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Please use async/await and try/catch" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Like I said, this code looks incorrect. Why is it still looking up the attribute? Why is it getting the type from `nested->type.struct_def` instead of `field.nested_flatbuffer`? Are you running `generate_code.sh`, because I think `nested->type.struct_def` would be null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think this is the correct way to do it.", + "reference": "Actually, I'm not sure why lines 1663-1668 are here. Looks like Push descriptors aren't used in the test at all. @ziga-lunarg?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Don't we still want to check it it's a keyword?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "this can just me `link_text` :tomato:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "What if the Series contains null values?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to use it.", + "reference": "Every place you see a change like this, it's because `PhysicalLocation` is now its own object, not an array of `PhysicalLocationComponent` objects. The `Uri` is the key into the `FileInfo` dictionary." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Like in atss_head" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I'm not sure how to avoid it.", + "reference": "nit : I think it would be better to have the multiplier being calculated along with `pool.numPendingWholeBlocks`, so that we could always multiply the feePerByte with that multiplier. Not only that it would be faster, but it would also have constant time. btw - Correct me if I'm wrong, but with this change, you're practically rolling back your previous change while making it `pool.expFeeFactor` adjustable, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Is there a reason we _wouldn't_ want to do this? A bit of a security hole :grimacing:" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Please add a copyright notice to all new files. Is there a tool to check and auto update copyright notices?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the label here.", + "reference": "A new translation dump should be made after this change (removing the \"Email\" message)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "CI is failing saying `expected [TypeError: null is not an object (evaluating 'implicitNodes(role).map')] to equal null`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "@JoviDeCroock I replaced the refs here with simple assignments." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "nit: Could we use VisibleForTesting annotation here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have an associated topic.", + "reference": "Can we create some post records to assert sort_by" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "is this necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "What is the purpose of this? It seems like it is used to indicate whether there is a filter on a span. But what filter? Could there eventually be multiple filters per span? Just not understanding." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "using a certain type instead of using string directly." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "fix trailing," + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]", + "reference": "I've fixed it for this change but for future reference there's no point doing string substitution for a single value like that - it will just slow things down. Just use `:mlat => trace.latitude` etc instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "The form no logger needs validation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not null?", + "reference": "there'd be more changes in the area, when we implement \"clean-up\" of aggregators if no new updates. (i think we currently send metricitem to exporters with zero as value)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Usually we only keep the assertions that are relevant to the specification (ie. the test title). For example, the test on the values of id and details is not properly relevant for the spec _collections are isolated by bucket_. I suggest that you only keep the assertions regarding `details` in dedicated tests similar to `test_unknown_collection_raises_404` from `test_views_records.py`, but for each of bucket, group, collection and record in the other `test_views_` files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The test sources are ok though, you don't need to remove those changes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "`maxWidth: width * 2,` Potentially, this will be the same as `getImageUrl`: 80px or 500px. I can't verify this - need for normal LiveTV tuner." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Not really related to this issue but should we use fuzzy search here as well (like for apps)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "isn't the usual capitalization for subcommands force-qr? (don't care too much about it)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Do you know how many repos have hit this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `usage dashboard` table.", + "reference": "I'll be interested to see if our gettext rake tasks will pick up on this text to translate" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I think you need to change line 928 value from 6 to 7 too, since now table will have 7 values" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Does `f0[::-1, :]` mean all the rows taken in a reverse order?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.", + "reference": "Looks like there are strange characters here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It is better to have a check to ensure the format is valid." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "How about `nextAlreadyDefined` variable name in method signature?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "In older SDK versions the data converter was called 3 times but now it is 2. This is because logic was changed deep in the interceptor chains on when values are serialized and encoded and such. Previously we invoked the data converter on results _even if there was an error_ (and most of the time they were nil). Now we don't do such a thing, resulting in fewer calls." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "formatting... can this import go next to the other sources ones?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "I don't understand why anyone would pass 0? If you don't want to attach to an existing process you just wouldn't pass -attach. I would remove that sentence and make 0 an invalid argument." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This change is responsible for #2775" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Should we add this to the other \"never\" verification in lines 71-73 above, too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])])", + "reference": "Fixed this since it no longer needed to be switched from a generator to a list, this was missed when I cleaned up the dataset code in an earlier PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "This is an informational message that allows someone to read the console output and understand how the grid node is configured. Please leave." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Can we convert this to an arel as below ContributorFact.joins(:project).where(projects: { id: project_id}).where('name_id =? or name_id in (?)', name_id, AnalysisAlias.select(:preferred_name_id).joins(:project).where(commit_name_id: name_id) )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Does this cause issues if you have lots of load on the machine? Having a global variable for this seems like a bad idea IMO." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception, but I don't think it should be an exception.", + "reference": "We probably don't need to print the msg with e.getMessage(). It will be printed by the logger since we are passing the exception as a parameter." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Can we get a test with multiple directories as per the initial example?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a while loop.", + "reference": "I assume this is because you were seeing cases where left was a negative number? When?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "this is undoing recent changes for increased consistency of include file statements. please restore to the original." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the base class.", + "reference": "If these are applied in order, should `LambdaMethoReference` come after `OptionalOrElseMethodInvocation`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why this rename?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "Why do we do this check here? `sys.version_info` cannot be less than 3.3 as pylint does not support older versions. I think we should avoid popping `__main__` altogether." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `server_cmd.extend` function.", + "reference": "This can be removed too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm a little worried about the new extra calls to `MakeMdId`, since in most local-server KBFS profiles, hashing is the biggest CPU user, and not re-using the value calculated by the client will result in even more hashing. That said, I understand why you did it this way, and I don't have a concrete suggestion on how to make it better. Just something to keep in mind; plus it might be worth comparing the test speed before and after this change to make sure it didn't slow things down too much." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `WPAnalyticsDashboardWidgetTopPagesTable`", + "reference": "`lodash` shouldn't be grouped under WordPress dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "Just curious, but how did you work out that Aleksey Sadovoy, Peter Vgner and Joseph Lee contributed to this file? Did you look at the repository history?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))())))))((((((---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "You could call OnStopRude() directly here to do the same thing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "This TODO and this `sort` depend on how the UI looks like. So I think we should fix the UI before continuing on updating this web API. For example, in case the UI flow is as below, this API will receive a Piped ID and then return just ones belonging to that Piped. - User picks where they want to deploy first (select one Piped and one cloud provider) - Then API will be called to show the list of suggested apps for that Piped and cloud provider - User picks app they want to create" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this command should be in the command line. It should be in the command line, not in the command line.", + "reference": "This command rolls back the volume data to the specified snapshot. Once the roll back to snapshot is successful, all the data changes made after the snapshot was taken will be post. This command should be used cautiously and only when there is an issue with the current state of the data." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "should this be a separate/new functional test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can these also assert at least the length of arrays returned and ideally contents?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "`hasattr(task, 'param_visibilities')` is more concise with the same effect, but either one works." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.", + "reference": "I would hedge this a little, maybe `Positional arguments appear to be out of order`. After all, it's just a guess." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "you can directly call show() method from **SnackBarHandler.show(coordinatorLayout, getString(no_account_signed_in)).show();** no need to create an extra object and then call the show method." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `NetworkUtils::hostFromHostAddr()`", + "reference": "concatHosts may be a better func name to explain this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "A function that returns empty string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If it's not the root package, or if it is the root package but we don't add the psudo :pleasings rule there, print an error." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "can delete this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the generic data store.", + "reference": "Will it still be an issue if all the models use the same data set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "How does this controller_name method work? Does this method grab the context of the url request? Wouldn't this always result in 'widget'?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "Let's get rid of these for the final version and if you get rid of the macro I left last time I'd be more than grateful." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Instead of `DELETE_MARK`, how about `IS_DELETED`? I don't think that \"mark\" is clear enough to describe what this is. Similarly, I think the docs should be \"Whether the row has been deleted\". There's no need to include \"delete mark\" because that's identifying something that is not defined (this column is _deleted and \"mark\" is not introduced), and \"or not\" is unnecessary because it is implied by \"whether\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Does it make sense to have this very thin wrapper that only calls `create_dependencies`? And maybe having `create_dependencies` return a set would be better than convert here?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "How about renaming `escape` to `use_path_normalized` or something to better indicate that it is a selection between `path` and `path_normalized`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this interface is needed.", + "reference": "Interface members are always `static final` right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "It seems to me that this could be in the runtime_nintendoswitch.go file, or is there a reason to keep it separate?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this. I'm not sure how to fix this.", + "reference": "I was actually looking at this code over the weekend and wondering whether we were trying to link here. I assume it's been cargo culted from something else in the compiler." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a label to the label. I don't think we should add a label to the label.", + "reference": "nice extraction of the form for being used at new/edit. We should have more of these" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Are the coefficients the actual bug fix?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why are the error code options in a list and not a tuple?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test. I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Need alignment with the preceding line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Changing from a static method to a constant is inessential to Type Transactions and has a long reach, adding many unneeded files and diff lines." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "There is one caveat: javaslang.collection.Iterator is Iterable. With Iterator it does not work. Let's revert this line. Does this happen elsewhere, too? I will double-check the code..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the format_satoshis() function.", + "reference": "Why change the default value of `is_diff`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I think tacking on `,<7` would be a wise precaution in case of future incompatible changes in tenacity." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "I don't think is necessary to remove the return type" + }, + { + "prediction": "should be null.", + "reference": "Also added this check, since client secret is not used except in the IP bypass scenario." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "That's unrelated, but shouldn't there also be a call to `setInternalWebPropertyID`, making it empty, for this case? Otherwise, when selecting to create a new property, any previous internal web property ID will still be in state, potentially causing problems." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "I wonder if we should trigger a PHP error and ensure it ends up in the log?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This test is off, verify the behavior.", + "reference": "The `move_topic` action be a `post` request since it changes the state of the object." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Should we just return a non-nil metadata from `Test`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `EmailPreview` class. I don't think we should add this to the `EmailPreview` class, but I don't think we should add it to the `EmailPreview` class. I think we should add it to the `EmailPreview` class.", + "reference": "Noticing this is really just the same as cart_notification_email. Would be nice to be able to view custom templates. I may update this with some set up that will make viewing specific custom emails easily." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "please don't use wildcard imports" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Should we even fix this test? IMO it should be refactored to check that values are recalculated after `setSourceDataAtCell` and `setSourceDataAtRowProp` calls. This will be the correct way to alter the data since now and we're not testing this use case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I'm not sure if this is standard practice, but I would prefer to leave this initialization here, if only to show that such a variable exists in this file (instead of inferring it from the globals). It can also cause weird issues if, for example, `init` isn't run before other methods." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This isn't how you throw an exception in C++. I'd suggest you take a look elsewhere in the RDKit C++ codebase and see how ValueError exceptions are thrown. Hint: there's a function called `throw_value_error()` that you may find useful." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Was changing this to a write transaction required?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: I think \"They\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "is it a result of some multiplication or some other meaningful number? would be nice to display as a power of something or the mult" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think this class is a good example of where Payload could significantly improve things. I'm okay with this class as it stands. If you merge this in, I'd like to have a go at refactoring it after introducing Payload." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Just a small tip: I think you don't need to include pytest here. You can run tests using: - `pytest tests/path/to/my/test` under the virtualenv to run a single test. - `pytest tests/` under the virtualenv to run all the tests. - `make tests` to run all the tests for all python versions, like travis do. Hope this helps! :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Might be worth sorting the replacement items so this is deterministic." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate file.", + "reference": "Should we set the default `TargetNamespace ` to `chaos-testing`? I noticed that the installation script defaults to chaos-testing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why was this `Task.Yield` removed? It was added in purpose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "You'll also want to do this below, for the `optionalFieldConfigs`. See `GapicMethodConfig.java:180`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "We'd better use \"spaceId\" as variable name here. Because i can't figure out the really type for \"space\" at the first glimpse due to \"auto\" used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I assume we have a package reference somewhere that pulls down the nuget package?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "But why introduce publish on `accConnsEventSubjNew` subject if we never subscribe on that subject. What is the plan then? Replace subscription on \"old\" with \"new\" at one point? Not sure about all that.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "can we use `nullptr` for consistency?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "strange, for templating\\EngineBundle it was `\\Symfony\\Bundle\\FrameworkBundle\\`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check for merge or booted.", + "reference": "But if we're on the merge deployment, and the next one is the booted deployment, we'll still be inserting between the merge and booted deployment, right? It seems like we would need e.g. `met_merge` and `met_booted` vars to keep track." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Can you put the output of this into data, and list which roles are invalid? Same thing with abstract role. I know that's not strictly part of this PR, but it'd make the messaging about this a bunch better." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "rename ibftTwo arg to bft" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we go ahead and push `agent_is_crawler?` into the `skip_session_tracking?` method?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.", + "reference": "How about we raise a warning here and simply change to use self.data_infos = self.load_annotations(self.ann_file)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed to synthDrivers/_espeak.py", + "reference": "Please remove this line to comply with the standard for copyright headers." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "seems incorrect - for 5 validators it will tell that 3 is enough to seal and you need 4 2/3 * 5 is 3.3" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Nit: please remove unnecessary whitespace changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name to something like `resource_` or something like that.", + "reference": "Is this captured in a test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This is used in o.a.l.sandbox.search.LargeNumHitsTopDocsCollector." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We may also do the same for `schedule_2x.py` and `schedule_20e.py`." + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Should foreign key here be something like `diary_entry_id`? Or above, in `diary_entry.rb`, it should be `diary_entry_id`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "session is a new term. Should we call more like currentCommandBatch or something else?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Will go fmt before squash." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Setting this to `true` means that it will always get merged in. The way merging is done here is that if a value is its zero value (`false` for `bool`), the value is considered unchanged. In order for this to work, you'll need to change this to be a `*bool` type instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `BlockSignerAddress`", + "reference": "It was decided that blockSignerAddress is not only redundant (use the miner owner public key instead which is already stored), but does not belong in config." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `setup.py` file.", + "reference": "are we not asking for trouble here by not pinning this? or does 3.* imply all of the draft versions we'd try to validate?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "No, we want to compare `tm_py` and `tm_cpp` in this test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Let me know if we'd rather have this as an env variable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "question: what is happening here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the AbstractSetTest.", + "reference": "\\[Checkstyle\\] ERROR: 'protected' modifier out of order with the JLS suggestions\\." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the tests.", + "reference": "Can we use EJSON from bson here? and in doing so avoid bringing in the deprecated `mongodb-extjson` lib `const { EJSON } = require('bson')`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "So this parameter is now deprecated?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Actually, it looks like HAVE_RSEQ is only used to determine whether the rseq.h header is around, which then only determines whether the regression test is built: it does not affect whether the core handles an application using rseq. The core rseq mangling code and all the code in rseq_linux.c is always enabled. I believe the idea is that we want DR built on one machine to work on as many others as possible, rather than requiring a custom build for every variant of kernel feature or whatnot. What is the top-level problem being solved here? If it requires disabling or enabling the core handling rseq, probably a separate option should be put in place and maybe HAVE_RSEQ renamed to make it clearer what its consequences are." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I don't see a corresponding call to freeSelectorSet... am I missing something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should redirect to the dashboard path without an auth origin.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Is this part of spec?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((-(-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Hmm, do we need to do this for Windows too? It won't have this private loader TLS issue but it will run DR code in a separate thread before DR init is fully done which I think violates some assumptions. For Windows we would move this wait from win32/os.c to win32/callback.s intercept_new_thread where it checks whether it's a client thread right before calling dynamo_thread_init. If you do not want to deal with Windows you could bail on my suggestion and leave the issue open (or maybe file a new issue) for Windows, or if you want to put the suggested core/win32/ change in place and your new test passes on Appveyor we could then claim to have fully solved this related issue too for all platforms." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return the lambda name from the lambda name. I don't think we should return the lambda name from the lambda name. I don't think we should return the lambda name from the lambda name.", + "reference": "We can remove this function and use `lambda_function_name(..)` in this file instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nitpick: `ApplicationVersion` could be `AppVersion`. It's smaller but gives the same understanding for purposes of the field." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return the error if resp is nil. I don't think we should return the error if resp is nil.", + "reference": "nit: maybe prefer `resp = &workflowservice.PollWorkflowTaskQueueResponse{}` over adding another function exit points especially for non-error cases?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we specifically need to keep the read preference as a symbol for use elsewhere? If not, I think it would be cleaner to just modify the options before caching them in the `client_options` method so that we don't do this check every time. If we do need it a a symbol elsewhere, I'd suggest either putting `return @client if @client` at the top of the method (and changing the assignment below from `||=` to `=`) or moving this within the parenthetical block in the last assignment so that we don't repeat this work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Since this is for video only, should it be called `preferredVideoMimeType`? If we add it for pictures later, it will likely need to be a different option." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "That doesn't make sense. LayoutEntry doesn't match the generator concept." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `Load Balanced Web Svc`", + "reference": "I think the customer visible strings should be \"Service\" instead of \"Svc\" to make it obvious to them" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to false.", + "reference": "Explain why this property is necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "It should accept executions as the input" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.", + "reference": "Is this limitation necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": ":question: Should there be validation to ensure that only one of these attributes is used?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I would recommend using Psr\\Container\\ContainerInterface here instead of Interop\\Container\\ContainerInterface; both currently work, but the Interop version is deprecated and will eventually be removed, so using the Psr version will save us time in the future." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "This would also change back to /var/www/html/docroot if we go that way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared shared", + "reference": "Does this need to be public? Can't one of the helper functions below pass the data? If it really needs to be public, could it be write-protected?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Thanks. Now that you've improved this we should just init and expose the StorageAPI on the node, like the other.s" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "it will be better if you can provide some examples" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "\"return type\" and \"response type\" have never really been contrasted before, and it's unclear what their meaning is here. Could you clarify?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This is a cross-subpackage import!", + "reference": "Import order has been violated here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Are you suggesting deleting the concept of message querying from plumbing (sounds like more trouble than its worth) or suggesting deleting the snapshot based implementation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this flag.", + "reference": "I recommend using StringSliceVarP to resolve the label flag, like `-l key1=value1,key2=value2`. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `addTabIcons` method in the `addTabIcons` method.", + "reference": "@Samuell1 Will assigning the same icons array to all the tabs result in, for example, a primary tab called \"Colours\" and secondary tab called \"Colours\" having the same icon?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.", + "reference": "A docstring for this function please." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Hosting.Server.Features` class.", + "reference": "heads up @JunTaoLuo" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": ".GetMethod() cannot return null now, correct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Same thing here, I think the proper fix is elsewhere." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "errno is a global variable that might be set by any system library call. It is dangerous to rely on it except right after the system call where it is set. But in this code, it looks like the library call is buried inside ExpLOBInterfaceSelectCursor. It would be safer if the latter function saved errno after whatever system library call it calls, and returns that as an \"out\" parameter, which this code could then check." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "`hasattr` is kinda terrible; just append extra info in the subclass." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Fair warning, the way that exception block is written won't work in python3 Python 3.2.3 (default, Jun 8 2012, 05:36:09) [GCC 4.7.0 20120507 (Red Hat 4.7.0-5)] on linux2 Type \"help\", \"copyright\", \"credits\" or \"license\" for more information. > > > try: > > >... raise ValueError(\"foo\") > > >... except ValueError,e: > > > File \"\", line 3 > > > except ValueError, e: > > > ^ > > > SyntaxError: invalid syntax" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "This only updates the metadata and not the actual thing you are trying to solve for the docker hypervisor." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.", + "reference": "should this package be internal? don't we want to use it e.g. in go-contrib?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Just curious, why did you make this change?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you handle error cases such as `pd.get_dummies(pdf, prefix={\"A\": \"foo\"})`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Where is this environment variable being set?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "`module_class ` is already a class and `type(module_class)` always returns ``" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into a separate method. I don't think we should move this into a separate method. I think it would be better to move this into a separate method.", + "reference": "Nit: The lambda can be replaced with a method reference: `SparkOrcWriter::new` I think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.", + "reference": "It would be nice to have a docstring that says what range of integer-like objects will be accepted, as well as what the int_like argument is meant for." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the migration file.", + "reference": "How do we manage updates to this view down the road?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We can revert this to reduce the diff of the PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message.", + "reference": "I think we should refactor or drop this test, as it is not testing the points format now, but IndexingChain/FieldsInfos' logic. Maybe we could rename the test `testMergeMissing` and configure the first segment to not have the `id` field at all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "not sure I follow why all this goes away?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));)););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););", + "reference": "Is this `{clipboard}` or `{primary}`, as the deprecation message for `:paste-primary` says?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "Human unreadable. IMHO user should input MYST value: 0.0006 @chompomonim, opinions?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "May be you could elaborate on why you removed this? I see some of this logic has been moved to ia2Web, but couldn't there be cases outside ia2Web (i.e. UIA) in which case ROLE_TABLEROW and ROLE_TABLECOLUMN are mapped to objects, in which case these objects will be of presentation type content erroneously?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be removed.", + "reference": "This is not consistent. Either rename the first to `tradePlayerItem` (which is ugly) or the second to `partnerTradeItem` (:+1:)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "is there a reason we don't want to gx this dependency?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a function. I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I'd suggest to add \"ATI \" and \"Intel(R) \" to this list" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This is using a different lang key, we should switch it to using the new key and remove the old key if it is no longer used." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the regex here.", + "reference": "shouldn't this work? nodesRegex = regexp.MustCompile(api.SpecNodes + \"=(('[0-9A-Za-z,_-]+')|([0-9A-Za-z_-]+)),?\")" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the `before_create` method.", + "reference": "You mentioned this change was prompted because the `before_create` action was actually a defect. This will be done only for a new record; why is `before_validation`, which will be called repeatedly as accounts get updated and saved, correct whereas `before_create` is not? It looks like one would want to assign and activation code, etc., only once." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it should be a constant.", + "reference": "What's the rationale for a default setting to not use a GlobalSamplingRate of 1? I don't know much about the sampling rate stuff" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Don't we know if it's 64 by this point? Do we have to test for the directory on every call, or can't we just split the value based on the platform?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the menu. I don't think we should add this to the menu.", + "reference": "It's not async" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Maybe we could add some use of `exporterOptions` in this example, otherwise the proper code would replace this variable name with an underscore?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe would be better to rename it to \"onEveryKey\" or \"fireOnEveryKey\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the file page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page page - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -", + "reference": "if we're switching to calling FileDownloadHelper, we can just call that directly from the xhtml (see line 357 for example) and then remove this method completely. This is because the other thing it does is check PrivateURLUser, but the FileDownloadHelper method already does that. (and while we're at it, we can remove the method from FileUtil as this is the only place that method is called)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "is `fullName` still required as a parameter?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get rid of this?", + "reference": "This informational message is important to users. Please leave." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I'm not sure why it's needed.", + "reference": "Why do we want to remove this one? Are we planning to substitute it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.", + "reference": "We may create an issue to track this so we don't forget?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this helper.", + "reference": "This file has the executable bit set." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "Improve the formatting of the message `.Infof(\"setting db capacity to: %v\", db.capacity)` There is a space before `:` and this way it is easier to see the formatting." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `mutex` or `mutex`?", + "reference": "This lock cannot be released here, as it is protecting m_RTPSParticipants and the participant reference." + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need to do this?", + "reference": "we'll need this in `_findAndModify` too" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This is the fix for the crash. The function to create the intent to launch this activity requires `dbName`, so it has to be set to `null`. In such cases, the value for `dbName` will be set to `null` and cause issues throughout this activity. This adds a default value if the explicitly assigned value in `null`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a bug or if it's a bug, but I'm not sure if it's a bug or if it's a bug.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we also trigger vision update here, so that if someone has caret highlighting enabled the correct character is highlighted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate package for this.", + "reference": "Woah, how does this change, which includes semicolons, result in the baseline change? Are the semicolon chars just part of the internal representation of the import type?" + }, + { + "prediction": "- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -", + "reference": "Can't you just use runnvda.bat here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.", + "reference": "these definitions of UNUSED aren't the same as the one you imported, so callers should be fixed (if any)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "is type a free string too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "here input could be a normal function or an instance of torch.nn.Module." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Example output: \"19.03.git.a7f4a860d0c\" At some point `nixpkgsVersion` was renamed to `version` since someone may use an old channel we fallback to `nixpkgsVersion` for backwards compatibility." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `LanguageTreeReadAction` action.", + "reference": "Class import is therefore redundant I guess :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "If parsing fails, don't act as no IP specified. Error out." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this enum is a good choice.", + "reference": "... here the semicolon wanted to run away from the enum ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Note that this is in the context of SolrCloud, so \"secondary\" doesn't apply and should be instead follower" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "This one is a query parameter and probably really should be ID and in fact I'm mystified as to how this is working because the controller code definitely wants a number for that parameter so the test framework must be converting it back to an ID as best I can tell." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Need to ensure this is set to TRU for LOB datatype access too not just for hive." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "You're using the Sphinx docstring style here (maybe because it's the default in PyCharm?). Instead, you should use the NumPy style (that you've also used in other places) to be more consistent with the rest of the project." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `StartLocalhost(engine, ServerAddress.FromUrl(Constants.DefaultServerAddress));`", + "reference": "Don't really need this since the rest of the method will no-op but it's also safe to return early." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Don't use relative paths. src directory is already on the include search path" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this file should be in the project root for more information.", + "reference": "this file can be removed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be required.", + "reference": "Do we have test cases that name is null?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((( code code code code code code code code code code code", + "reference": "in a separate PR, I'll check for a table that is empty/all-null and skip this function call completely." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `Exception`", + "reference": "We really, really want to catch _everything_ here. It is safe to leave `azkabanEventReporter` set to null." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Can't we add the check here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "body is being used here for the first time without every being populated. This will error. To run tests do `./go clean test_py` and that will run the Firefox tests" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Tell me if you have a better field name for this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "FYI, I have a branch I started to improve this. Nuke can read the target frameworks from the project files, so we don't have to do this mess. Ran into some other issues so it didn't take priority" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "This is just `mol->atomNeightors()`, is it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "This alias is just for a single occurrence. Maybe it ins't necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "You can delete this `NONE` case." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "@cnorthrop -- here is a test with a name change. Is this going to affect your internal CI?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Nit: `Headless` is one word, not two, and so doesn't need camelcasing in this way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a parameter.", + "reference": "I think this will cause a warning, can you set the default to zero (`0`)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "confusing naming. Identity from \"id\" package :/ why we need alias here? (and in other imports)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list.", + "reference": "It'd be nice to fix up existing configs with the change - that'd mean adding the option to `RENAMED_OPTIONS` in `config.py` and adding something like `_get_value_transformer({'true': '', 'false': '*'})` to `CHANGED_OPTIONS`. I think I never tried adding an option to both, but it should work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Perhaps use the new `.keys()` method here instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "We don't need this option because plan-preview is comparing between 2 commits, not using the live state." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm not sure about putting this in the options. I would see it living in an object and then being queried on through a class - a more object oriented, ruby solution." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "So `Status` returns metrics?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "Can we make a generic method say, `set_infographic_view` and in that method we can check the 4 values (outside_committers, portfolio_projects, outside_projects, affiliated_committers) and check against params[:action] and params[:view] and then trigger the respective method dynamically as it takes the standard argument(s) for all the four methods. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why would this be called to copy a non-Date object?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "This alignment issue had not appear because no multiple `Boolmsg`s had been serialized at once." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to false.", + "reference": "Why are we not implementing a BooleanDefaultFalse struct and replacing all of these config vars that default to false with that? Are \"default false\" config vars not affected by this bug?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Replaced this method with a ruby idiomatic setter." + }, + { + "prediction": "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation.", + "reference": "wrong place hehe" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this in.", + "reference": "Can this be `test -e /var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock` instead of `ls`? Using `ls` for noninteractive stuff is a recipe for sadness, IMHO. /cc @tianon" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.", + "reference": "Are these `dependent: destroy` attributes intended to implement cascading deletes? I had assumed they were added because of the `paranoia` gem, but since that is no longer part of this PR, are they here as a best practice?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `destroy(tunnel);`", + "reference": "This approach would work only if there's a guarantee that the stream does not get freed before `establish_tunnel` is called, even though it _may_ enter CLOSE_WAIT state (at which point `stream->tunnel` is set to NULL). I do not think that assumption holds. Hence the alternate approach." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Did you mean to remove the periods here while newly adding to other locations?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "the check can now be `if newLen < 0`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "If we're going to clean up this package, can we also remove those two `_` imports that appear to serve no purpose? (FWIW, they're also in the manager package too...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" ( \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Won't this leak like a sieve? The caller can't delete this as one is a unique_ptr and one is not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to delete this file.", + "reference": "form => from" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a property descriptor, not a property descriptor.", + "reference": "Ok, we can't switch it now, because the properties are a field of the interface Rule - which makes it public API. Maybe we should remove it here in the (Java) API in 7.0.0? The only API left would be, when using a rule and setting the properties in the ruleset xml. There the type doesn't matter - since the String is then automatically converted into a Pattern." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Pass in null here, instead of a value? Maaaaybe we should add an overload for `GapicProductConfig.create` that matches the original signature and passes through null? I don't feel strongly about that though, so happy to leave asis if you prefer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Include all compounds parts from the very beginning for the case check to work later" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "if the user specifies a url scheme on the cli this is going to cause problems, no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think that's a good way to do this.", + "reference": "How about that `scaleFactor`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "`assert(is_int($result));` would be preferable I think, even if we know it can't ever be false" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I'm unfortunately unable to review whether you've changed everything that used to use cartIds" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Please don't touch unrelated files to keep the git history clean" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Per our style guide, I don't think we indent `private` keyword. Would you mind fixing that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Will this change the input `heatmap`? Is this behavior expected or not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "If I'm reading this right, this changes the parameter name so it'd constitute a breaking change :cold_sweat: Are we missing a test that should have been failing up until now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "Need copyright/license info." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Is this `info log` necessary? If it is not useful, can you consider deleting it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This file's header starts with RCLONE_ENCRYPT_V1 instead of V0. This file's header starts with RCLONE_ENCRYPT_V1 instead of V0.", + "reference": "Unrelated change, but seems to be the correct purpose of the test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Should it be `'uppy-input-`?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "what's the reasoning to keep these always true or dead-code blocks?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "It would be a good practice to do `.off('click', '.tab-buttons > div').on('click', '.tab-buttons > div', function() {`" + }, + { + "prediction": "Should this be automatically enabled or disabled based on discovering the gateway?", + "reference": "I suggest that we rely on `--controllers='*,gateway-shim'` for now, and we can then move from `--controllers='*,gateway-shim'` to automatically enabling the Gateway API support on startup using the discovery API in 1.6 or 1.7, what do you think? Note that the logic I wrote in e5436df521015057e77de3fe02c174ea8a863b93 should also use this `GatewaySolverEnabled` flag I think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it's better to create a new class that extends Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract Abstract", + "reference": "I moved the instantiation of the signature algorithm here, to execute it before the native libraries are configured. Otherwise the wrong signature algorithm could be configured in a future release when more than one is supported in Besu." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should have a service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service", + "reference": "`this.ieService_` should be initialized to null in the constructor." + }, + { + "prediction": "Why do we need this?", + "reference": "Why not `ebpf::BPF bpf;`? Assuming that the instance is not huge, I do not think there is a good reason to use a pointer when it can be retained as a value." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "nit: move to last block" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: I'm under the impression that `log` is the convention for golang, and that the `er` suffix is usually reserved for interfaces" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "Why is IsolationLevel fully qualified? System.Data is already in scope? What do I miss?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this interface.", + "reference": "do we still need SanityCheck()? seems they all return nil now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "What I am missing in this PR, and I think we discussed that on the weekly meeting, is that all the code snippets that advise using `loadData` should be changed to one of the two new methods. Otherwise we send confusing mixed signals by promoting `loadData` everywhere in the guides. `loadData` is not deprecated, but is legacy." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Line is too long. [100/80]" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I suggest \"no parent snapshot found, will read all data\\n\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "`LogManager.ThrowExceptions = true` has very special meaning when unit-testing. Why the change to `LogFactory.ThrowExceptions = true` and enabling after the config-load?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "It should be return \"''\"; I will fix it" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "This is wrong, should be `entry.getValue()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "nit: why can't we combine the two add operations into one so that we add `{\"nameCertificates\": []}` to `/spec/servingCerts`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "These whitespace only changes make it very difficult to review this change. Is there any way you could separate just the code changes into one PR and the whitespace only fixes into another? Or are they sufficiently merged together at this point? Chrome is having a real tough time rendering these large diffs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "why does this suddenly need a config ref" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Unfortunately, I couldn't find a way to get karma to conditionally load stuff from a CDN, so I had to include it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AuthalicMatrixCoefficients` list.", + "reference": "Those functions are not currently wrapped, so I don't think it is necessary to exclude them (at least for now)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.", + "reference": "Nit: since this is now a private function rather than a variable, would it make sense to move it after the public functions in this file for readability?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "I'm assuming that MolDraw2Qt drops the alpha channel?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "the code looks good to me, but I just wonder if it is a real use case: (de)serializing a single integer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to print the formula.", + "reference": "Pls remove the print statements. Also, you do not need the if statement." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Thanks for this fix @eltone! Wondering if we should make this a bit more resilient to upstream changes, e.g., via a regex replacement. Not critical, though - we can pick that up in a follow-up PR.. Thanks" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should setSniff(false)", + "reference": "Should this be instead a configurable option?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "unit test needs an update?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I realised that this is not used anywhere" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to close the sigChan in the watchConfig function.", + "reference": "why add the default branch? this may cause there exist multiple configWatchers that notify the eventsCh at the same time?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to send Zlp here. I don't think we need to send Zlp here.", + "reference": "This line appears to have caused the regression. What is it supposed to be doing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "# `attr_value['string'] is not None` probably not required as `attr_value['string'] == value` check is already being done" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "@alanwest I noticed this while changing the code. I think we _might_ run into some race condition - if a scraper happens to hit the HTTP server before we could add the reader, what would happen (I guess we will hit exception, which turns into HTTP 500)? I haven't looked into the HTTP server logic. I think it _might_ be OKAY. A better version could be - we only start the HTTP server once the exporter/reader are fully ready and both are hooked up to the provider." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate test, so that we don't have to wait for a shutdown.", + "reference": "As for Owin, I think we should exclude this URL in `IsNotServerLifeCheck` too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `HttpClientFactory` interface.", + "reference": "Does it make sense to just fold these options back into the exporter options? My thinking is that this option is unlike the processor/metric reader options in that it actually is about the exporter itself." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "here is `:seconds` missing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "change of name is not needed" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the test.", + "reference": "Hm.. so this case doesn't work anymore?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Please indent this so it lines up with the `(`" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "We should still register the script. Just not enqueue it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think this can stay as a method. And we can write our own attribute_change(name) as required." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "@alexshikov @Cheesebaron I might be missing something but isn't the viewType parameter here the actual layout resource id? Why would the GetItemLayoutId method need to be called again? On line 127, the exact same method is called except this time passing in the index of the object in the backing data source, which makes sense - the template selector can return the layout id based on the index of the item in the list." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to use `self.dataset.dataset_id` instead of `self.table_id`.", + "reference": "Can you change this to use `.format()`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the rule.", + "reference": "Maybe the parameter should be consulted higher up the stack so that we only set dropEncap if we're rendering a workload egress chain and the flag is set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the `GeneratePoStRequest` from the `GeneratePoStResponse` interface.", + "reference": "new casing is less ELiTE" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))(()))(((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This leaks EGL/GL implementation details into the generic renderer interface." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good error.", + "reference": "Maybe add *key* i.e. `\"The \\\\`deploy.on\\\\` key should be a hash (dictionary).`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this line.", + "reference": "its be good also change $code na $id, actual name is misleading and that was probably actual error generator" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I changed the name of the key, to make deployment easier." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "isn't this going to be true by default? if yes, then let's have the env var named `ECS_DISABLE_SPOT_INSTANCE_DRAINING` and have default as false." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))).", + "reference": "Do you think we might need this anywhere else in HoloViews?" + }, + { + "prediction": "isVideoDirect)))))))))))2))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend", + "reference": "@MrTimscampi don't we want to remove this term entirely? Might as well do it now if that's the case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I have followed the convention of `cp`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The docs say it's `false|null`" + }, + { + "prediction": "How long...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"...\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" ( \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Thinking on it more, I actually really like your idea to rename `type` to `factor`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This error message is redundant. All of this information is included in the stack trace. In general it's a good idea to avoid using method names in error messages. Chances are the method will be renamed at some point, but the string won't be updated accordingly. Then you'll end up with a very confusing error message. I suggest changing the message to: \"Failed to unblock network loads. Missing INTERNET permission?\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "This file is covered by the GNU General Public License.", + "reference": "Feel free to add your own name while at it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`signer` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "shouldn't this be `&& opts[:localize]` (i.e. both nil and false skip localization?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This can also be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a const char *target, not a const char *target.", + "reference": "Not critical but \"common\" is not that helpful in the commit title. Maybe go with \"libkvs/txn:\" for this one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.", + "reference": "It's been a while, but I just noticed this was wrong: It migrated `True` to `when-searching` (so people with `scrolling.bar = True` suddenly didn't have scrollbars anymore) and `False` to never. Instead, it should migrate `True` to `always` (no behavior change) and `False` to `when-searching` (so people notice the new feature). I fixed this in cc0f5fc6d400e12833ba729049e31d16cf836d53." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": ".decode(sys.getfilesystemencoding()) will be better. Although I think rrdtool should accept bytes.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `HttpHeadersHandler` class.", + "reference": "An interface call per header might be more expensive than we want to pay. Do we really need this to be abstracted? I think a parser abstraction makes sense, but it seems to me like a separate abstraction for handling headers (one by one) might be an overkill." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Resharper annotations, always +1" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "same here, CryptoSm2 won't be changed once command is compiled" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Loading the login page after the certificate has been loaded. Views can only be loaded from UI thread." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Technically it doesn't belong here; let me remove it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "remember to update the hash once the upstream PR is merged" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "Sends the incoming message to the decryptor, which will then forward it to the interface once processing is complete." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "FYI This will go the other way, with nil being the correct value for \"no params\"" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Is this necessary? Are there duplicates in your LibKeyIndex?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why will the gomock files be regenerated? It seems to be irrelevant" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I'm very curious about why using buffered-channel. Is there something wrong to use an unbuffered channel with zero capacity?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "It seems like you accidentally pulled some unrelated changes to util_test into this." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "do not toucm NDM please - there will be lots of conflicts" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This looks legitimate - Would cause a classCastException. But have we ever seen it in the wild?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to set this to True.", + "reference": "This looks out of scope for this particular PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Don't need () if only one." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Why not have mailPort as int since your are already parsing while calling t.connect?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "In the future, do not remove these trailing commas as they have the purpose of making append-diffs easier to read. :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Was this added by accident? It doesn't seem related to Syndetics, and I don't think it should be necessary in core VuFind (but maybe it's related to one of your local customizations)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.", + "reference": "i know the ergonomics are a little nicer with map[string]bool, but I prefer map[string]struct{} for sets for a few reasons: 1 - optimized storage (not very relevant here) 2 - don't have to think about the conditions where the key exists in the map or if the value could somehow be false" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This is very unclear what Server means. We need a better name, maybe ServerExtension?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "I wonder if we should trigger a PHP error and ensure it ends up in the log?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Hmmm not sure about this. Is it fine @ar2rsawseen?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "Why do you prefer `go` over `run`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should mockCommunicationManager here.", + "reference": "Unintentional, please remove" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "What was the reason behind moving this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "Did you mean to put that `join` after the `map` rather than inside it? Also should it be `safe_join` or is interpolating it into an `_html` resource going to have much the same effect>" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`Indicates if this Realm has been closed.`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "how is this change adding corr to Series? Do all the methods that are added to Frame automatically get added to Series?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Just a heads up for anyone else reviewing this, this logic and all the repetitions of it should be greatly simplified by subsequent work relating to issue #2552." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "@billwert I have kept the `1000` InvocationsPerIteration, but do note this is very small for the small types." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Unrelated whitespace change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the rai_wallet_store_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store_wallet_store.", + "reference": "Slight formatting issue here. There should be a space after the asterisk." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i want i i i i i i i i i i want i i i i want i i i i i want i i i i want i i i want i i i want i i want i i want i i want i want i want i want i want i want i want i want i want i want i want i", + "reference": "Slight preference for declaring variables inline rather than at the top of the function. That way you can use const for both of these." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "this is a duplicate file of the one in demo-schema. please remove this file." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable? I don't think that's a good idea.", + "reference": "Nit: unified names between geth and contracts" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Necessary? Could you just use DefaultBuildState here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "linked hashmap retains order" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "And the old names for these variables made more sense imo." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Are you sure this change is correct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "The previously linked bug does not apply anymore? If so, this is LGTM!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why are we renaming all of the tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Instead of having this logic, would it make sense to require *users* to encompass the specified IPv6 address within `[` and `]`? Why the magic handling here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Why not also replace this one with calls to `GetProp`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should consider strongly negative numbers as winners. I don't think we should consider strongly negative numbers as winners.", + "reference": "Still need to remove trailing spaces on this line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "Please use the `@Experimental` annotation on this" + }, + { + "prediction": "We should retry calling the Read function. If we received a non-io.EOF error, we should retry calling the Read function.", + "reference": "I found ~10 more instances of this typo. we can fix those in subsequent PRs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "How about making metricNamespace an option, and by default it's the same as `component`? e.g.m Init(component, WithMetricNamespace(\"trigger\"))" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Just checking: no need for case manipulation?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Same as above, not that descriptive" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "> i#4670 signl-interrupted special ibl xfer frag: Unlink if signal pending nit: This looks like one of many commits with the text before the colon. nit: On the long side: 56 or 60 chars is what some views show Spelling error." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Should we need to invoke pthread_cancel?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "this is auto generated file so no changes are allowed here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return undefined if the textarea is empty.", + "reference": "All buttons are submit buttons, except if they are `type=reset` or `type=button`. I suggest you do an exclude of those, rather than only include `button[type=submit]`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "can you please make this multi line, this version is hard to read." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "For consistency, it's best to either always use strict equality (`===`) or loose equality (`==`) in `typeof` checks, and to not mix them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this trait to the project title.", + "reference": "Work Orders would never have only one approver, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant. I don't think we should change it.", + "reference": "`code` is written to the message as a `byte`, so I think it's better to declare it in the enum as `byte` as well to avoid a narrowing primitive conversion from `int` to `byte` in runtime." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "This is the only \"extra\" change here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please TODO and link to an issue for changing this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we make the script output trailing commas?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `dashboard` section.", + "reference": "This file should get a file header" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this file.", + "reference": "maybe we need process the os error more safely and friendly when open file failed, because this error is very common when cpu has a high pressure, crash directly is danger." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "we need to pay attention not to use this flag everywhere." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "curious about this change, since it is not mentioned in the commit message and now we have `uint8` all over the place" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "wait, are we not mising `WithStamp` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "oh. didn't know we store this stage progress." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Going with definition from here: > Does Unicode have private-use characters? > A: Yes. There are three ranges of private-use characters in the standard. The main range in the BMP is U+E000..U+F8FF, containing 6,400 private-use characters. That range is often referred to as the Private Use Area (PUA). But there are also two large ranges of supplementary private-use characters, consisting of most of the code points on Planes 15 and 16: U+F0000..U+FFFFD and U+100000..U+10FFFD. Together those ranges allocate another 131,068 private-use characters. Altogether, then, there are 137,468 private-use characters in Unicode. It looks like we are only ignoring ones in BMP and not the supplementary private-use characters. Shouldn't we consider the supplementary ones too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "This change is un-tested and requires testing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice.", + "reference": "Should the docstring mention the vscode option?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "ISTM that since `artman` know the \"real\" value of the GAPIC config name, it should pass that value to toolkit, rather than toolkit guessing the name based on a heuristic. Then again, I don't know what this value actually does for Java codegen..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please back out the import changes in files you haven't touched. I think these happen if you run goimports without having the vendor directory populated" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #", + "reference": "Should this be `ISocketOutput where T : struct`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "In which case will this actually return 0? If there is no snapshot, then there is no `Snapshot` object, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "This part of code is valuable and necessary. Can we move it to another place for a more clear logic and only check it once? For example, move it to line 133 before delving into each module." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Are we at all worried that changing pins will cause release hiccups? I think we've decided that relaxing pins should be safe but adding pins has caused us build issues in the past - so I think we're fine?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "could you please explain a bit where these numbers come from? for example: why is there no `swarm.EncryptedSectionSize`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "s/object content/blob object/ (for consistency with the `Size` docs)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Rather than deleting this entirely, could we just emit it as a `warn` or `info` log line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Is there a chance of this being a BC break of somekind? I.e. what if an old instance of Caddy is running in a cluster with a newer one?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Thanks for this... is this the only place where the rollback is needed? Are there others?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should this also be a pointer? What happens if there are no BLS messages? I guess that's what this test is exercising, and Lotus also uses a non-pointer here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This was definitely a subtle bug right here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "If this method gets all the emails, it should be named appropriately. **all_emails** or just **emails**." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we still random, but if we randomly get a port is used before, we randomly pick again?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need create_no_window here.", + "reference": "I would rather no have this as a `kwarg` as it encourages \"growth\" which lead to an unweildy constructor in other classes. Let's add a method or property to take care of this instead as I think it's usage is going to be quite low." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "what if a purchaser is also an approver? or would that not happen?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Not sure why this change. You forgot to handle the case where the user has dynamic fees disabled and there are no fee estimates available. He should be able to sweep none-the-less (as he is using static fees anyway). The line with `config.fee_per_kb()` below, that you have deleted, handled that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "sorry, I wasn't familiar with this TopLevelCondition... What it would be in this case? The AuditsLogReady condition?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Where does the `alloc` field get set?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "looks expensive to do it on each query" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `nyc_taxi.csv`", + "reference": "@rhyolight -- but weren't we supposed to be standardizing on using underscores in file names (versus camelcase)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Can this simply call `in_memory.empty?`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this, but I think it's worth to do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "The styling/wording here probably needs some thought. It's more of a placeholder." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "Using a plural route helps in detecting the path automatically for `= form_for @password_reset`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is `metadata` required on all tests? I actually just removed the metadata field entirely from a few tests in my PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "seems reasonable to also want to include the 'to' location?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not remove shutdown hook if we don't want to do that.", + "reference": "I don't think we need to necessarily check if that returned true or not, we should just remove the shutdown hook. Since nothing would check or do anything with this flag anyways." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Better to push getting policy details into a func we can reuse later." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "optional: while there's nothing to do, a good way to catch bugs (where we use an outbound without calling `Start`) might be to have this outbound verify that `Start` is called before `Call` or `Stop`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api-provider-aws/pkg/apis/cluster` file.", + "reference": "Not a blocker by any means, but I think there is value in keeping the local imports in a separate group." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "nit - I would test the error message as well. For panic, you might need to see if the stack contains the error message, instead of equaling." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Didn't we have specific logic for handling slices vs structs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to inject saylinks if not found.", + "reference": "`c_str()` is not needed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "The handler will be installed twice if you don't remove the below one." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "How about putting `epochLength` (or something like that) in place of `a` just to make it easier to read" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Wouldn't this still fire afterwards if you created one called `pleasings`? or am I missing something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't love this syntax; it doesn't match anything we're currently doing and it's not obvious. Why isn't this `/keybase/private/jzila,kb_bot/.kbfs_autogit/public/jzila/kbp.git`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Does a type-hint work instead of casting? `return ofAll(toList(). zipWith(that, mapper));` (Probably not, just a question.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Are these required?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the max control line size?", + "reference": "This is consistent for all clients that we will check yes? Seems like we should just use the singleton, maybe pass it to the parse function or since clients have a server pointer set it at server start and just access that way without locks?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Note that this is a bug, that should be fixed on master. `DECIMAL_LITERAL` cannot match any token, because it's declared with a `#`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `nats-io/nats-server/v2/server/pse` file.", + "reference": "Don't need extra line here." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "For the first look, this change is strange. Were we passing these tests before?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to do that.", + "reference": "On Windows, doesn't `os.Args[0]` include the `.exe`? What if you run the program like `caddy.exe`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.", + "reference": "I don't see anywhere where `ServiceConfiguration` interface implementation would return any kind of error. Not sure if its needed, but we could ALWAYS return a valid 'pseudo' configuration without possibility of error." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Do we actually want to split on `\\r`? I thought that the \"newline sequence\" was only `\\r\\n` on windows." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Nit: these lines are duplicated from above. They can be refactored by setting etype in a conditional and putting 282 and 283 below that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I would do an s.Notice(\"Initiating Shutdown...\") then after Shutdown() do the original Server Exiting." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Not sure with how many seconds on average are we dealing with but maybe it's better to have hh:mm:ss format in logs - you can make it with `TimeSpan.FromSeconds(seconds).ToString()`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Why is this required? The user should be able to omit it and use the defaults." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I don't think the naming of this setting conveys what it does. Maybe something like \"Ignore mouse movement triggered by other applications\"" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))(((((((((-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Didn't went with backwards compatibility since it's still in beta" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Perhaps bondsToCut must be None or non empty." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the chartType here.", + "reference": "See above, we could avoid adding that (same applies below)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "should use Number instead of Long" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Should the rest of the file be updated to use `expect` or should this test use the same format as the rest of the tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error` or a `error`.", + "reference": "How would you feel about a different approach where the `DeleteAWSRecordSets` gets passed the zone ID and zone name rather than the `DNSZone`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "it seems `random.uniform(0, 1)` similar to `random.randint(2)`, all have 1/2 probabilities." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Added to support EBS volume creation, used like this: blockDeviceMap = [] blockDeviceMap.append( {'DeviceName':'/dev/sdc', 'VirtualName' : 'ephemeral0'}) blockDeviceMap.append( {'DeviceName':'/dev/sdh', 'Ebs': {'VolumeSize' : '100'} })" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "We shouldn't depend that url is `mysterium` - it can be just `testRequestURL`. Also, `URL` has to be upper-case." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" (\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\"", + "reference": "We could delay this look-up now and only do it in the non-skip case. I suspect this is true for (almost) all of the top-level refactored functions." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Typically, to be simple, we could reserve a const length space." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import `Builder` here.", + "reference": "Need to add a license and copyright header to each file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `checkout-signin-signup-toggle` method.", + "reference": "If I'm not mistaken, this line is now outside of the `if signed_out?` block, right? Any concerns about that? Seems odd that we wouldn't accept coupons for signed in users, but I want to make sure we understand the ramifications of this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Please remove the unused import of DBPDataSource." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error and log the warning.", + "reference": "I think you should add some extra message here saying it was originally sent as an error, for diagnosability." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not change the test to change the test to change the test to change the test.......................... BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO BO", + "reference": "I believe that all the changes in this file are not valid for v1.2 of the Avalon toolkit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and merge the original role and the original role.", + "reference": "we cannot change the behavior of the processRole - that method is used in lots of places. this call must be done only in the method where templates are being handled." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should rename this to `HostExecConfigDir` and rename it to `HostExecConfigDir`.", + "reference": "I think we probably want to follow the same naming convention that we do with `execAgentConfigFileNameTemplate` (using the SHA in the name of the file). This file might be confgurable in the future and when that happens we will be ready. Plus it's pretty much the same code that we already use for the config file." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "If following above, this would be: end_time = time(0) + manual_wall_time_option, which is simpler. Also, make the check manual_wall_time_option > 0, otherwise negative times would terminate the worker right away." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "If we aren't using `errors.Is` we don't need the `Unwrap` as we have `Cause` which is what pkg/errors uses." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "redundant empty line" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it should be a bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool bool", + "reference": "The config.lua.dist still shows `houseAccountOwner`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we can leave this import and use non FQNs in the code." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'd rather just send the parameter twice than break encapsulation here. There's already precedence with webelement IDs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "We should probably exit early if there are no items in the list." + }, + { + "prediction": "This is a test docstring without params.", + "reference": "As we can't use old names we should warn in whats new for 2.12 that this can happen." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "good job finding this package, I hope it's actively maintained" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "same changes as in hipEnvVar.cpp" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "NULL check should be before this line" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(((((((((((((", + "reference": "Seems like client.getlocalplayer is being called a lot, would it be worth it to do final Player player = client.getlocalplayer?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "this change is not correct. 3-valued boolean logic requires that comparison of null to another value during intermediate operations should make the result null and not false. The place where null becomes false is at the very end of that expression. As an example, with the changed logic, this expression will return incorrect result. select * from t where not (a = 1); if a is null, the where predicate will become true which is incorrect. With the original 3-valued result, the where pred will become false and not return any result." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This can already be done with `{>Detected-Locale}`, why make another way to do it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "These changes just match the logic update in the next method that was done previously - to assure the whole set of files is valid rather than that there is at least one that would be changed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "Why setting the status to Continue as at the end it is written OK? Status should be written only once." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Howdy! You'll want to do this same thing (replace `hydrateParamCache` with `proofs/bin/paramcache` and then do the copy) in `smartdeps`, too." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this command.", + "reference": "nit : Remove the extra lines" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the `Options` struct. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Instead of adding a new option, I wonder if we could decide on a port that would disable listening. For instance, port set to 0 means that we use default port 4222. Setting to -1 means that we let OS pick a random free port. We could say anything negative lower than -1 (say -2) means disabled? You don't have to update the PR for that, just wondering if that would be better or not and let's see what others think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we add some default case if non of the above return some analyzer name? Something like `unknown analyzer`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.", + "reference": "Nvm. The original version is best... *hides from the angry rubocop*" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "we can drop this and use the returned body above, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is echoing enabled on purpose here or it's a remainder of your tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "I think this should just be worked into the next message and follow the verbosity of it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to pass the query to the `getServiceAccountSiteURL` function.", + "reference": "This also needs to be reverted." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "`FromCommand` seems to fit better, since with my suggestion below, all pauses will raise a signal on `needPause`. Also maybe the format `journalPauseConflict` and `journalPauseCommand` is better, since the journal isn't necessarily paused yet once we raise a pause signal." + }, + { + "prediction": "IsServiceNonRetryableErrorGRPC()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()", + "reference": "This is fix from another PR #120." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I *think* it makes sense to try the more general dictionary (i.e standard python literals) format first. Might be other implications I haven't figured out yet. Then again, ``MultiInterface`` is pretty new so it probably doesn't matter wrt backwards compatibility." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `$this->getContainer()->get('sonata.media.manager.category')`", + "reference": "lol that variable name" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Upper case is reserved for our versions of top-level chains i.e. the `FORWARD` chain jumps to `cali-FORWARD`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `receive_async` function. I don't think we should do this in the `receive_async` function. I think it would be better to do this in the `receive_async` function. That way we don't have to worry about the `receive_async` function.", + "reference": "json_handler::receive () has already started a read tx that can be used here right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.", + "reference": "We should add the definition to `.storybook/config.js` as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "ITM_AND) ITM_AND should be 0", + "reference": "I don't believe this is correct. Consider the query, \"select a from t1x where not(b = 0 and c = 0)\". When B and C are both null, both equal predicates evaluate to null, and the AND evaluates to null. The NOT then also evaluates to null. The WHERE clause should treat the result of the NOT as false. But with this fix, the result of the AND will be false, making the NOT true. There needs to be three cases here for ITM_AND: If the first operand is false, then the AND is false. If the first operand is true, then the result is the second operand. If the first operand is null, then if the second operand is false, the result is false otherwise the result is null. Similar logic needs to be added to the ITM_OR case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "`bound/2` is generally the previous bound that we tested, except when `bound` is equal to 1. It won't break in that case since callers are not supposed to call advance on a target that is lte the current doc ID, but this might still make room for bugs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we remove `raw`, `fullResult`, and `serializeFunctions`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "[Nit] I don't have a proposed suggestion, but security seems too generic of a name here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "do we need to force a buildConfig here? I know it's in muon, but that might actually be making things harder for people" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be true.", + "reference": "Shouldn't need this-> here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Why delete this?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This line is here to be compatible with the current way `refs` work, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Hmm, I wonder if we can safely assume all decimals should be displayed as $$...ok for now I suppose." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "Good spec :). Very clear and easy to see what it's doing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we need to sanitize the `params[:filter]` from a defined expected values?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we bite the bullet and poll for the full 5 minutes that AWS recommends? If we do that, we'll probably want to leave some kind of breadcrumb in the event log to let users know why it's taking so long to launch." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "Guava changed `Objects` -> `MoreObjects`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.", + "reference": "All these hand generated mocks can be deleted. I think we already moved everything to gomocks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "what about string/number etc _ids? this will fail." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error message, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Looks like the test had a bug prior to this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Should start with joplin://x-callback-url/. Also maybe create a helper function to check if a url is valid?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the id here.", + "reference": "PR works great. Just out of curiosity: why all the id changes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "config map first value is wrong, it aims to define the \"value type\", that value will lead to an undefined behavior." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "This doesn't make sense. The thing being constructed is a blob.Bucket. \"Constructing\" the pointer is trivial." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `import pylint.testutils.checker_test_case from pylint.testutils.checker_test_case import CheckerTestCaseTestCase`", + "reference": "Outch. A configuration/parsing refactor is on the radar but this seems more pressing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the date to the `membersStats.days` field.", + "reference": "Unfortunately this won't work when the \"All time\" range is chosen because `memberStats.days` will be `\"all-time\"` and not a number. What you could do instead is to use `memberStats.stats` as the dependent key and use `Object.keys(memberStats.stats.total_on_date)[0]` to grab the first date in the range and build the label from there." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Style/StringLiterals: Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "We need this left in as `axe.configure` is for the top-level page `axe` and we still need to configure the axe script inside the iframe as well (so both have to be configured)," + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "is this rule serviceimpacting? I'm thinking it's mostly around the modeling of pageable in the swagger, thoughts?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "same here, replace `ks` and `kc` to something more related to Source." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `MvvmCross.Platform.Converters` class.", + "reference": "We should probably ask here if `dict` contains a key with the appropiate value, and leave a trace in case it doesn't, to make it easier to debug for developers." + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "this should only be indented 2 spaces" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Nit, these Err not nils should be `t.Fatalf` not error. We want to the test to stop if this error occurs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "shouldn't every `Boolean` in this pr be `boolean`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This `if` is not necessary" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Are you using this anywhere? (I couldn't find it.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate function.", + "reference": "Can be inlined" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please use `kinto.core.utils.json`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this error.", + "reference": "Since we're returning the error with the same content, we don't need to log it here; it will get bubbled up and emitted that way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `final` class.", + "reference": "What happens if someone import `typing` and thus uses `@typing.final` instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Better remove this dependency altogether" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())((()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Could you please move the declaration to httpclient.h? I think we have a consistent pattern in declaring global variables in header files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "We will also need to add this to the spec." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "In startEvaluator, we have the paysetHint; we should use it to preinitialize the state delta allocation. The number of transactions and the deltas are typically growing in a linear fashion, so preallocating twice as much in the array initializer would be a good idea." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "we shouldn't add a bunch of static initializers 'everywhere' in the code. Probably just one would be good, during the construction of the 'RemoteWebDriver' class." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate test.", + "reference": "Would it be possible to move the creation of the `new { Prop = (object)_value }` out of the benchmark? In the current version, the benchmark includes the cost of creating and serializing the object, while if possible it should be the cost of serialization only." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Bundle\\MenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenuBundle\\KnpMenu", + "reference": "only dev and local" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should not be nullable, instead it should be `->default(0);`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "What about `selectedColumns`? I believe it is frequently used throughout the project." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "I thought we switched the approach from a payload to boost attribute? Besides; it's not clear we need this toggle at all since the user could arrange for this behavior simply by having the new DelimitedBoost filter thing in the chain." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "the previous code used 'export' when platform is cisco-5, presumably because 'env' cannot be used to load variables? I have no idea if that's the case but this env vs export logic is not here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "I'm wondering if we need to add some type of validation here that the SecretCount!= 0... Or do we think it would be valid to have a SecretCount of 0?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This test is being skipped. I unskipped it, and it failed in the same way for both `slaveOk: false` and `secondaryOk: false`. I'm not sure how else to test this broken test." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I don't believe that we need a pointer to an interface for the `to` side of this since we're just assigning a value to the to field." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.", + "reference": "No blank line after the docstring." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: move this to the group below." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This is fine, but maybe we should change the variable name to \"bufferSize_as_uint\"? Or \"...uint32\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Use snake_case for variable names." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Obviously, don't merge this to master." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Nearly there! This should assert on the output, take the result of \"start\" and \"finish\" as an example :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This loop is going to burn CPU if len(s.q) == 0. Maybe a small sleep?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "can you give a reason why session should be contained in RegionManager?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "You are comparing two signerIDs here, error message should be \"Signers should match\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "IAMRoleCredentials should be a struct, not a struct.", + "reference": "Who's acquiring this lock for writes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This throws a linter error, don't use object creation for side effects. I feel like it's kinda messed up that the errors are thrown by the constructor and not that the constructor will throw them" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should there be a `trail.topic_name` method so we don't annoy Demeter?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "instead of passing \"None\" it would be more readable to create a constant e.g. TEAM_PUBLIC = None and then call build_package(TEAM_PUBLIC,...)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "Would it make sense to include this file via composer files-autoloading instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the element element element element elementTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextTextText", + "reference": "Each `ExpectedCondition` implements `java.util.Function` These are expected to be stateless. This condition will leak previous `elementText` on the second usage, which doesn't seem ideal." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "Extra newline here. Thanks for moving it under the `testing` import though. This just needs to be grouped with the other imports below it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Should we ignore case when doing the comparison?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to make Wlr_HAS_X11_BACKEND_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_DISPLAY_ON_DISPLAY_", + "reference": "The same `ifdef` should apply to `#include ` line 14" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure why we need this.", + "reference": "We're instrumenting a static method, so there's no instance in this case. `diagnosticSource` is the first argument." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I feel like this belongs in `RecipientPresenter` (which should really be `MetadataPresenter`), but I suppose having it next to requestReadReceipt makes sense as well. feel free to leave as is." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right version here.", + "reference": "Let's go back to 1.4.0 until the release is being prepared." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I would avoid the term \"errno\" as it implies the glibc variable. Use error_code or status or something." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "@abhinav @kriskowal what do you think about putting the handler on `d`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why `restic.TagLists` and no `restic.TagList`? Because I'm using `restic.TagList` here and using `restic.TagLists` is a lot of changes" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(end(end)))))((end(end(end)))))((end(end(end))))", + "reference": "An hour seems a significant amount of time to wait for within a test, does it need to be that long?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Nit: (newish to golang, don't hesitate to tell me I'm wrong here, but...) I'd have written this code, just for readability: keepAlive := false return d.dial(hostName, tlsClientConfig, keepAlive)... or even return d.dial(hostName, tlsClientConfig, false) // keepAlive=false Personally I think Golang should have included named args; I think it's one of the things python got right." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the `Msmq` and `Msmq` to the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq` and `Msmq` in the `Msmq` and `Msmq`", + "reference": "I don't think it would cause any version conflict, but I'd feel safer if you declared it last, so that the numerical id of the existing integrations don't change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "Can we provide some more useful actionable info here? `fmt.Sprintf(\"The certificate request could not be completed due to invalid request options: %s\", req.Status.Conditions[InvalidRequestCondition].Message)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the API.", + "reference": "yeah, can change to 8545" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "As far as I can see you're not rollbacking transaction anywhere. This could potentially cause further issues(and very hard to debug ones) with not synchronized transactions between message handling. Is the transaction required in this place anyway? You seem only to be fetching data here. ack method is performing some updates so it makes sense" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "What's the meaning of null URIEndpointObject?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why did you remove the time? It can be useful if some actions are ran in jobs?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go.", + "reference": "What the reason to change imports?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the HiveMetaStoreClientPool class.", + "reference": "Nit: continuation indents are 2 indents / 4 spaces." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "You can use `netloc.rsplit(\":\")` for that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.", + "reference": "nits, I don't get the point of this change" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the log message.", + "reference": "`warningPrefix` looks the same on both platforms, we could move it up to `log.go`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What's the motivation behind switching to plural here? I think we want singular cc @abhinav" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "What do you think about renaming this method `FromErrorAndCode(code Code, err error) *Status`? One of the benefits is that it will be consistent with the naming of `func FromError(err error) *Status {` which does something almost similar." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "we cannot state that by default the same value is used if we stopped using null - it would suggest that when you change JSON RPC and leave WS port default then they would be same." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm still not convinced dropping Chrome logs is the right thing to do, but if you insist" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "It would be helpful to include some reasoning here. With the reflection model, it is often the case that names are not available." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "Instead of setting this here, why not have the flag call in the init function set `caddy.LogDestination` directly, and switch on that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.", + "reference": "This belongs under \"WordPress dependencies\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Was there an issue on `net452`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if (_forCompilationIncludeGlobalprefix) { if (_platformNotSupportedExceptionMessage!= null) { Write(\"throw new\"); } else { if (_platformNotSupportedExceptionMessage!= null) { Write(\"throw new\"); } else { Write(\"throw new\"); } }); }", + "reference": "Another option is to always write it without quotes. I always have to use SR. And why not?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should use the `merge` function added in #473 instead of introducing a new dependency" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log error.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this say \"a binding with descriptor type VK_DESCRIPTOR_TYPE_MUTABLE_VALVE\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This variable name should probably contain `grab`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Which initializer should we be using for open_aire? The one in `external_apis` or this one in `initializers`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "remove todo on line 28?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model.", + "reference": "clean unnecessary arguments." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Could the name of the status be confusing to users? It says the execution stopped but is it a temporary stop? Will it continue to run at some point? To me the name does not suggest a final status but a transition one. WDYT @sshardool @jakhani @djaiswal83 @aditya1105" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should import this from molecule.provisioners.", + "reference": "Since we created a Provisioners directory, can we do the same with the tests, and follow the same structure as the code?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "We don't need that one anymore?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Since we're determining the local node's host info in the `Store()` init, we need to import the `STORE` object here. Is this OK, or should I be determining the host info earlier. (When parsing settings?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an empty declaration.", + "reference": "I think, there is no `#getKind()` method anymore, is it? The approach would now be testing with instanceof. Or could we return a more specific type than JavaNode now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the button.", + "reference": "can we localise these? not sure if we have easy access to a translator instance from `generic-provider-views`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "This is the VID from Adafruit. Doesn't Particle have a different VID? (CC @suda)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "The function is only used once, and this body is now only 1 call with the same args (e.g. basically an alias for `vStringTruncate`), it could probably be simply removed. But if you wanna keep the naming for clarity, it also sounds reasonable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "please change to `could not connect to peer: %s`. it is not relevant to say \"from kademlia\" in a warning" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why need to remove this? Datetime has microseconds in fact." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What's up with this, isn't it nil? Why not use the real T value from the test function? @elcore @wmark" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "this feels weird" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this enum should be used.", + "reference": "I don't think this is the type of network we should be putting in our named networks." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "debug? I suspect this will be removed before merge?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "should this be here twice?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`generate_special` - a meaningless name for me. Can we provide more detailed naming?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This isn't something you introduced in your changes, but the change makes more obvious to me that this test would be better as a unit test of some kind (probably a controller test). Testing a 404 is an edge case that probably doesn't need to be tested with all components in integration." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "We chose `info` in the test code for obvious reasons. Changing to `finest` makes debugging harder and noisier." + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "any reason you're assigning to the local variable 'id' too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Need to fix this import :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state state", + "reference": "sorry these tests suck so much we are working to kill them" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Why not adjust `currentTime` to be in ms directly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "> restore, we find the matching spill for that restore which uses the same slot nit: Two separate sentences: separate with `.` or something besides `,`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to do this.", + "reference": "this flag not used" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't think `?? null` works here... that's to ensure PHP doesn't throw an \"undefined\" error about `$profile->expirationDate`, but now the code is assuming that `$profile->expirationDate` will be set. Might be cleaner to do: 
     $expiration = isset($profile->expirationDate)? $this->dateConverter->convertToDisplayDate(\"Y-m-d H:i\", $profile->expirationDate) : null;
    And then assigning the `$expiration` value in the return array..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "An ENV should be used? Are you sure that the Vue examples are built in the production mode?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Nit: this should actually always be float since we convert it before we construct the namedtuple." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The result of `FileUtils::fileType` could be saved, instead of calling twice." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to catch the exception here.", + "reference": "Can you log the exception?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "since this debug message is inside a plugin code, it should use flb_plg_debug(ctx->ins, \"...\"), on this case don't need the component prefix since the API will put it there automatically" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::", + "reference": "I also took advantage of the changes to change the Timestamps used in this notification from \"java.sql.Timestamp\" to \"com.yahoo.rdl.Timestamp\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "It would be nice all these tweaks to be configurable from cmd line, with sensible defaults" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "Why do we need this `check_same_thead` to be false? I feel a bit uncomfortable about this." + }, + { + "prediction": "Should be able to create object by passing in constructor.", + "reference": "We should probably test with constructors which aren't in the schema, and functions which aren't constructors." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "this call doesn't work doesn't? I mean there doesn't seem to be an 2 argument allocate overload. Maybe arg_logical_size should just be defaulted to the arg_alloc_size thing. Or we should just report out physical allocation size instead of logical." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This winds up flipping the desired values. Looks like I gave you a bum steer @kevpl" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the log.InitGlobal(cfg.Log, zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.String(\"addr\", addr.String()), zap.Fields(addr.String()), zap.String(\"addr\", addr.String()), zap.String(\"addr\", addr.String()), zap.String(\"addr\", addr.String()), zap.String(\"addr.String()), zap.String(\"addr.String(\"addr\", addr", + "reference": "nit: let's call our address ioAddr from now on" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if (enabled.gpu_validation && enabled.gpu_validation_reserve_binding_slot && pPhysicalDeviceProperties->limits.maxBoundDescriptorSets > 0) { pPhysicalDeviceProperties->limits.maxBoundDescriptorSets -= 1; } else { pPhysicalDeviceProperties->limits.maxBoundDescriptorSets -= 1; } else { pPhysicalDeviceProperties->limits.maxBoundDescriptorSets -= 1; }", + "reference": "You're killing this \"else\" case here which currently flags an error when maxBoundDescriptorSets == 0." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "Nitpick: I'd append `_cb` to the function name here to mark it as a callback. Otherwise it looks a bit like this will do the entire job of removing null checksum refs from a hash table." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "or you can use `filter(x =>!x.isView)`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Instead of NewBuffer on the line above, do NewReader to avoid having to wrap later." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "No need for this, as pylint already only turns things off for this function and it's needed for the entire function." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "extra brownie points ( overall solution ): we've currently triple-encoding the payset - 1. we encode it to calculate the block size. 2. we encode it to calculate the commit hash ( either via flat, or as Merkle tree ). 3. we encode it as a whole for the purpose of preparing the proposal ( I know that this isn't always the case, but this case happens to be on the critical path ). Caching the encoded data of the *first* block could help us repeating the process." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This assertion should use the actual expanded string, so that it is clear what the message produced looks like. Right now one has to run the code to determine what the message is." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "similar here for imports, these should be consolidated (and also consolidated with the grouping below)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Maybe there is no need to modify it. Because if you don't use the mask, it won't be initialized." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this. I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "Is there a reason we wouldn't want the trailing `%`? I'm guessing that without the trailing `%` it will just do a strict match vs a partial prefix right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please update the DMA test app in AFU repo once this gets approved." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "There should be a migration for that as well to reflect the change on in-production instances" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why does it have to be `\"\"` instead of an empty string" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is very strongly opinionated so feel free to disagree with me better, but as conditionals get more complex I like turn them into ifs instead of unlesses. What do you think?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Will this obey the seed set on Kernel?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We shouldn't use the `&.` syntax here, since we expect that `executor` will never be `nil`. For the functions that _can_ be called from apply / without an executor, `&.` is still appropriate." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception.", + "reference": "Why the switch from period to colon?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Can you just fix the warning instead? It's actually important for this to have a default of `\"\"` as the subsequent merges with `DefaultConfig()` and `fileConfig()` need to work. If you make this not `\"\"`, you break the assumptions of `Merge()`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in the config file.", + "reference": "let us not add this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Is there a need for group as well? crun sets both." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "@cijothomas This build-up pattern was really confusing. It looks like internally ActivityProcessor is intended to be chained but there is nothing in the abstract class that enforces it. We never set a \"Next\" or make sure that the chain is called. Probably need to do some more work in this area?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "`this.getFilter()` won't work on `pre('save')`. Perhaps make this `toySchema.pre(['updateOne', 'findOneAndUpdate'])`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Break out tests for events into their own tests rather than placing them in other ones. That makes it easier for us to figure out where problems lie and to do a TDD-driven implementation over new APIs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "I think this is the only place where we use `UvShutdownReq`. Can we remove the type altogether? Or do you prefer to keep it around?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in this PR.", + "reference": "I think we can get this to work by passing in the root ca cert fixture that upstream ca is using" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the batch job job job job job job job job job job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job_job", + "reference": "Just occurred to me to ask: is the condor log date in localtime or UTC?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move the Mushrooms to the Mushrooms list.", + "reference": "Can you remove the sculliscep varbits from here too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to update_5_9_2018() to update_5_9_2018()", + "reference": "I understand that it is a common practice in this script to add indexes this way but why don't we check index existence before adding it? I'm not very familiar with MySql but it's can be done easily in MSSQL and I'm pretty sure that there is a way to do the same here." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "we should probably deprecate (and display a warning) the misspelled keyword arg here rather than removing it... and then add the new one. This changes a public API and will break any code that is currently using the misspelled version." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Should we do something like `h2o__fatal(file, line, \"fatal error: %s, %s\\n\", mess, RSTRING_PTR(...))` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "is this one all platforms?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message.", + "reference": "why capitals grr?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Surely all the above should go into `common`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "This is an unrelated change, but was failing CI... probably introduced in master." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This piece isn't backwards compatible, but it's enough of an edge case that I think it's unlikely to be a problem." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "MB is presumably 1024 * 1024." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to `dashboard-splash.js` and import it from `dashboard-splash.js`.", + "reference": "Didn't we extract this logic to a `react-features` helper?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to.", + "reference": "But But, overlapping async writes will get corrupted" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the file. I don't think we should add it to the file.", + "reference": "Not your immediate problem, but having everything depend on a package that has the config for everything else is ick. Can you move the MessagePoolConfig here and reverse the dependency?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to waitSome() here.", + "reference": "recently, IME_ACTION_GO action can trigger key_down and key_up event successfully, so we don't need to send enter key separately as before, otherwise will trigger it twice and cause to enter empty passcode, which cause test failed." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "It seems that you only need to do this `checkExprDepth()` inside `deduceExprType()`. So you don't have to add this check everywhere." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error email.", + "reference": "why split into two lines?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to 1000?", + "reference": "Does this need to be public or can it be package-private?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.", + "reference": "Questionable way of looping through editors and calling `canEditFile` to show the edit button. Is there a better way?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Zip` class.", + "reference": "`that is null` doesn't sound very useful to me. Could we rename `that` to `target` or something less context dependent :)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to print the providers, but I don't think we need to print the providers.", + "reference": "Just to be consistent, can we use the print function `print()` instead of the keyword. Same goes for line 437." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I don't think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I don't think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I don't think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I don't think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I don't think we should keep the wallet in the config file. I think we should keep the wallet in the config file.", + "reference": "Having to pass in `price` and `limit` is pretty common. Do we want to have this be another argument, maybe a combined structure that can be used for every action that requires it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Could you move it after `stop`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" ( \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "The variable `method` seems not used. Maybe we can remove the parameter `bodyParamName` and generate it by invoking `ParamUtils.generateBodyParameterName(method)`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "I don't think this should be here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a bug?", + "reference": "Either I'm missing something or specs actors should remove this call cc @anorth" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please undo all these changes as they are white-space only." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "You forgot an optimization? `$countries = CountryField::FORMAT_ISO_3166_ALPHA3 === $countryCodeFormat? Countries::getAlpha3Names() : $countriesAlpha2;`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be changed.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this also return the current value specified by the user? At least that's what the docstring says and what the previous version did." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this parameter is necessary.", + "reference": "> the time range the listen search the time range of the listen search?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "This snprintf, etc. needs to all be inside the DO_ONCE: all this overhead happening on every single decode is likely a huge performance hit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.", + "reference": "would call it connect_retries" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Why are we using `repr`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "I use the same zms instance to check authentication in swagger endpoints. Same thing in ZTS." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test that is self contained. So that we don't have to rely on the binary file in the test case.", + "reference": "Consider consolidating the common code in a common setup method in tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "q: do you need to run the annotation processor over EthProtocolConfiguration prior to writing this file? (i.e.to ensure ImmutableEthProtcolConfiguration exists)? Does Auto-import etc. still work in the IDE?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.", + "reference": "What is the motivation for switching from `Schema` to `DiscoveryField` everywhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "What happens when ECS Init/whatever's starting the Agent mounts some other directory as Agent's data directory (`-v /tmp:/data`) sets `ECS_HOST_DATA_DIR` to `\"/var/lib/ecs\"` It doesn't seem like a strong enough abstraction to be dependent on Agent configuration options to expect `ECS_HOST_DATA_DIR` to be the same as whatever's being mounted as `/data` on the host. My main concern is the late-binding/asynchronous failures this could lead to if the wrong host mount was specified. Wondering if there are better alternatives here. Can we at the very least inspect the Agent container and check if `ECS_HOST_DATA_DIR` is mounted? If the answer is that we'll revisit the validation here at some latter stage, that's fine too. But, I want us to be aware of potential failures here." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "btw that's obviously out of scope of this PR but since i noticed this line here it reminded me a thing: on some systems i've noticed the font didn't had those characters, so it was just a square or empty space and sometimes they're just a bit shifted in position (if font doesn't have them and using from fallback font which have incompatible dimensions of characters) how do you think is it worth creating an issue to discuss/address it or it could just waste time on bikeshedding?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "alias is not needed" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Do we need to include the path?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "During our zoom and working on this, I said that I believe it was set to 64MB, not 32MB, but the diff shows that I was wrong. So we could change it back to 32MB." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Here I thought you always insisted on ` log \"github.com/Sirupsen/logrus\" ` :) I might do a PR that just globally switches that out wherever we have log." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "We maintain that each (logical) key generation has the same set of device keys, so no need to plumb through `keyGen`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Please use `from unittest import mock` instead of this package." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Should be `if (this.options && this.options.cursor) {`. Options may be undefined. Also, going forward, mongoose will always use curly braces around if blocks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This should remain as mailrelay.blackducksoftware.com for staging. Not sure this will be valid, but it shouldn't go through the production mail server." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a bug or if it's a bug.", + "reference": "Maybe we should have a Debug.Assert for when `Slab!= null` to ensure that we are always returning the block (in our tests at least)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should delete props.defaultValue", + "reference": "Okay sorry about this I was really confused on how to support uncontrolled in this case, so what we want to do is apply `defaultValue` when `props.value` is falsy but not undefined, right? In the case of us seeing it is controlled (value & onChange present) we apply defaultValue to `props.value` (and delete props.defaultValue) In the case of uncontrolled we shouldn't enter this branch at all and go for full native dom behavior" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate file, so that we don't have to re-import it every time.", + "reference": "`lodash` shouldn't be grouped under WordPress dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this label is the right label. I think it should be `app=admission-webhook` instead of `app=admission-webhook`.", + "reference": "The latest yaml in openebs/master has changed to name=admission-webhook. cc: @prateekpandey14" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "using **an** Amazon Simple... Simple Notification **Service** (singular)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Probably don't intend for this `1 ||` to still be here" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Looks like this is failing to compile on Windows (VS 2015 I think)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "nit: call the arg something simple like `f` to avoid repeating \"beforeQuery\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "do you think this should be `osd/auth` as a pkg to make it more unique and void conflicts with other `auth` packages?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why are you passing out the Message?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Yikes, this was a bug :grimacing:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `Subscribe` or a `Subscribe` method.", + "reference": "I am not sure which one of these is considered idiomatic go... maybe @azdagron has an opinion here? /me prefers the verb since it's shorter. I guess I don't care _too_ much, but it would be good to get some general agreement so we are all following the same conventions" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Please check this for error and emit appropriate debugging information. I know this was pre-existing code, but we just have to fix things like this as we go." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This seems unrelated, should be a separate PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should include this in the `engine_create_dispatcher.h` file.", + "reference": "Never use relative includes, prefer full path" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "This should fit on the line above without going over the 79-char limit, no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space is too long. [8/80]
    Space is too long. [8/80]
    Space is too long. [8/80]<", + "reference": "Is this related to the other contents of this pull request?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `WorkloadOpts` struct.", + "reference": "Should this be `*string`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.", + "reference": "In the old code here there was no Source Selector, but CreateDefaultProfile will specify a Source Selector of `\"\"`. Is that equivalent?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]`col` by reference? I think you can prepare map `prop`=>`col` in L51." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "I hate to ask, but can we make this flag shorter so it lines up? :(" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Note to reviewers: latent, dedup import" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Seems this func is no more needed after your refactoring." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "already added (see several rows below)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit: a switch perhaps?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Great you caught this. Super critical to not retry these errors." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::", + "reference": "Just a little change to make the var effectively final, which is clearer." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Using `\"{}\".format(...)` is a bit beside the point..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think these should remain as they are." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Let's just call this PERF_PACKAGES and have them in the same format as WINDOWS/SLES/DEBIAN_PACKAGES constants - since it is only a single package and, as written, you'd have to update the code to add more package names anyway. Might as well be consistent with the rest of the code." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it should be `deviceIndex` or `deviceIndex` or `deviceIndex` or `deviceIndex` or `deviceIndex`", + "reference": "We don't have a `getPluginIDfromTaskIndex` function? I think it should be implemented in Globals/Plugins.h /.cpp" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "@shalinmangar If lazy field loading isn't enabled, I don't think this actually changes the behavior of `SolrIndexSearcher`, since it was previously ignoring the fields list anyway. What it _should_ do is allow certain distributed queries, like the ones in `DistribJoinFromCollectionTest`, to co-exist with `SolrIndexSearcher#doc()` respecting the `fields` set instead of just discarding it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Should we be using version 3 now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.", + "reference": "Would be better to throw a more specific exception, but for now it will do." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "We should not replace Wei with a type that is shared across multiple units. We need this as `Wei` for type and unit safety." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if the file doesn't exist, don't try to set the permissions.", + "reference": "I'm pretty sure this should emit a util.Warning*(), since we're skipping by here and never hitting anything that will give them a warning about what's happened." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This function isn't useful? it's just a clone of GetParserWithBuiltins?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "I'm not sure if the boolean flags should always contain `is`, also I generally hate too long names... ;) we already know this is a section for circuit breakers, so the name doesn't have to repeat all of it. How about `cpuBreakerEnabled`, `memoryBreakerEnabled` etc?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Before we start the replacing equality deletes with position deletes, I think we need to refactor the RewriteFiles API to adjust more cases: 1. Rewrite data files and remove all the delete rows. The files to delete will be a set of data files and a set of delete files, and the files to add will be a set of data files. 2. Replace equality deletes with position deletes, the files to delete will be a set of equality delete files (we will need to ensure that all delete files are equality delete files? ), the files to add will be a set of position delete files. 3. Merging small delete files into a bigger delete files. The files to delete will be a set of equality/position delete files, the files to add will be a set of equality/position delete files." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Layout/TrailingWhitespace: Trailing whitespace detected." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "Is it possible that the shortcuts list is empty?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This just changes the error message from `unable to save snapshot: [...] context canceled` to `canceled`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "maybe it's better to remove HttpHeaders.CONTENT_LENGTH after the loop" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a list?", + "reference": "Very cool. We are now collecting the fruits after your length implementation!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the whitelist.", + "reference": "Is this the same copy of the rules file from above? If so, can just use the copy from above, and this can be dropped." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Please break this into multiple lines." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Shouldn't this new line replace the few lines above?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Perhaps this belongs in universe?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "there is a `kEpsilon` you can use directly." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "This should be grouped with the below imports, and the two separate groups of imports below should likely also be grouped together" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "It looks like this error_code field is used to return a string to the caller, not just a const input string to be consumed as in the rest of this PR? If so, my personal preference would be to leave it as a std::string* instead of a reference; I don't know offhand what the VL coding style dictates." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "If return by value, then why bother to make it `static`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "You'll need to add docs for the argument, see e.g. the `debug_log_filter` docstring above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `sdktrace` file.", + "reference": "`sdktrace` or `tracesdk`, pick one." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return empty array.", + "reference": "can we return null instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "You mean XXX and \"we should\" or \"NYI\" or sthg. Maybe put it on the ifdef line." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "minor: can be in-lined in return" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space is too long. [81/80]
    Space is too long. [8/80", + "reference": "why the additional \"\\n\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This seems to be a big omission. If the first buffer reports an error, stream seems to just discard it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Maybe move this one down too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be readonly.", + "reference": "We do this in lots of places I'm starting to notice...typically you'd avoid taking concrete dependencies, but we also avoid package dependencies as well which makes sense (i.e. not using an IoC, etc.). Any reason we don't implement some form of poor-man's DI and/or a simple factory instead of new-ing things up everywhere. This may be a simple example (as I'm guessing this is likely the only place this is ever or ever will be used), but separating them doesn't take any more time/effort either really." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "What if formatPrefix doesn't include a space? Will the resulting error have e.Error() stuck at the end without any space?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "that doesn't say a lot to me. Can you please be more specific on the function of pushsync?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, but I don't think we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, and if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout, then we need to check if subpass has read-only depth aspect layout.", + "reference": "> subpass uses a depth/stencil attachment in renderPass with a read-only layout for the depth aspect Assume - VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_DEPTH_READ_ONLY_STENCIL_ATTACHMENT_OPTIMAL - VK_IMAGE_LAYOUT_DEPTH_READ_ONLY_OPTIMAL count as well seems there is a `NormalizeDepthImageLayout` for this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "This shouldn't be altered, you probably meant to update `AREA_PAGE_DASHBOARD_ALL_TRAFFIC` further below :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "what does this change do exactly?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "What's the purpose of this `backgroundCtx` field?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "non contract incarnation" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.", + "reference": "I would recommend to leave out `None` because None is already the default." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.", + "reference": "Should the \"bad hello message\" case above also disconnect?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.", + "reference": "Shouldn't this be in the child and not in the base plugin? Wouldn't having it here enable all derived plugins at once?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Should probably say REGEX or PATTERN rather than string." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `testEventWithPayloadSize`", + "reference": "I felt we don't need to set it that strict, like if somehow pubsub happens to allow extra 20 bytes for metadata, this test won't work. We would suggest to use 11MB instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.", + "reference": "In theory `isset($metadata['associationType'])` is `false` if the linked field is not an association field, isn't?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I'm not sure why it's needed.", + "reference": "@tute the only thing I needed to enable this like as `password` is not in default flow anymore I think." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "nit: to be consistent with `self.members`, please move this up one line, so that it's closer to `allUsers`? You will need to update your test reference." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "we might as well just access `config.gClientVerbose` directly here. If any other options are passed to `gclientSync` or `gclientRunhooks` then the verbose option will be lost the way it's used now" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `log_events_comment` function.", + "reference": "Change the key to `default_tab` instead and I'll merge this" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "we still can end up passing a blank org_id to the scope method if for any reason the params is not present..." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::", + "reference": "I think yes, this makes sense to expose this. +1" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the value here.", + "reference": "let us put the sample yaml snippet i.e. maya api server deployment that makes use of this env & value" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.", + "reference": "What changed to cause this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Repeating big interface in many places shows smtg is wrong with design" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the controller.", + "reference": "Inheriting from `AccountsController` to get access to the `redirect_if_disabled` filter." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "Enter at the end of the file! :-D (and at the end of lines ;-) )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this column to the migration.", + "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Don't you want to place this check before you add `succ` to `newSucc`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Commit 676eeeab10884456a5f70ce708a8aa5116ecbaf7 contains a lot of unrelated code style changes. Please get rid of these." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `if bokeh_version < '0.12.6': raise RuntimeError('Bokeh png export only supported by versions >=0.12.6.')`", + "reference": "Well this sucks, I wish you'd mentioned you were using a private API, perhaps we could have made a public one with better guarantees before `0.12.6` was released." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Consider instead moving this into an _test file so it's public but only usable in tests." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?", + "reference": "Any reason why we want to remove this code? It helps debugging AWS ebs attach issues. Ideally yes a library should have minimal logging, but there is no way we can track long running AWS attach calls." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `INSERT INTO experiment_run VALUES ($1, $2, tstzrange($3, $4, '[]'), NOW())`", + "reference": "nit: indentation doesn't match (unfortunately i don't know of a way to automatically lint these sql statements with how we're using them currently)" + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need this in the `setup_profiler` method? If so, I think it would be better to add a `setup_profiler` method to the `setup_profiler` method.", + "reference": "Should we remove the other `setup_profiler` call site and just let this be the one call site for it, since, AFAIK, the other one is no longer necessary with this? Also, can we make `setup_profiler` private?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Are there any other templates where this command needs to be added, or were those issues specific to storage requiring us to enable a new command group?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "perhaps file can be removed altogether (trying to avoid an empty package for these build tags)" + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@", + "reference": "NULL change, could you move that out too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "A brief explanation about this func is required." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Could you add description for below static function?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Since this is only counting the failed attempts, can you call it failedAttemptsCount or retryCount instead of attemptsCount?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I don't think this will work." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.", + "reference": "Since http2 is coming do we want to call this something more specific?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I don't think we want to revert the accessibility issues the tool caught, do we?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should check the number of connections.", + "reference": "I prefer naming this rateLimitedRemoteHost This can be local host but reads remote Host Is Non Local." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Hmm I think I might've messed up this condition here... Need to look more at it" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This also makes the exception to be raised on non-dict falsy values which I think was expected." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to True.", + "reference": "Is this correct? The auto indexing behavior caused problems fixed in a recently merged PR..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Hmm, didn't we just find out that 1.6 *does NOT* work? We should bump the minimum as well." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Will calling `abort()` cause problems for our test suite?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "for my own edificaton, what's this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "make it harmless to commit ws == nil" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "Hmmmm, I'm not sure I like these becoming a replacement any build rule has access to. It seems like if it were used in an actual build rule it would only be doing bad things. Can we just use `filepath.Abs` on the returned path in run_step.go?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "That's actually not as bad as I thought it was going to be." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not available in the API?", + "reference": "Hmm, I'm surprised if we don't already have a \"find all unpublished datasets\" method but I don't really know. Maybe @scolapasta knows." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "The checks in this file are disabled by default since they are meant for Python 3 porting, and this one does not have to do with Python 3 porting at all." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a property.", + "reference": "I would change \"should be sent\" to \"must be received\"." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should delete it. I don't think we should delete it. I don't think we should delete it.", + "reference": "Please put it in following way : `// DeleteStoragePool receives StoragePoolClaim delete event and calls the required handlers to delete other pool related resources.`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "It's better to use servicecomb now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Make the flag derived default available in the readiness controller" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Confirmed this test fails when the fix is reverted" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This method is still possible insecure as it may archive not only logs files. I suggest to filter file names to ensure that they start with `.mysterium-log*`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the base module.", + "reference": "DCN should not be able to use `init_cfg`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure why we need this.", + "reference": "It is a bit weird to see a message like \"something must be valid\"." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Again. This is part of the start up of the server, and the diagnostics are helpful." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I think you need a `,` at the end of the line?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Please avoid wildcard imports." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Client` class. I don't think we should do this in the `Client` class. I don't think we should do this in the `Client` class. I think we should move this into the `Client` class. I think we should move this into the `Client` class. I don't think we should do this in the `Client` class. I don't think we should do this in the `Client` class.", + "reference": "Did we consider making the timeout an argument to the build task? Would amke it easer to configure in the future: change a build property vs. rebuilding the DLL." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "dumb question: the commit message talks about dual-stack support but it seems that in a dual-stack cluster, Egress will only support the IPv4 address family?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Do you want to cherry-pick these separately and get them merged already or keep it in here? Both is fine with me!" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "Hmm what are these magical constant numbers? And why does this change mean they should increase?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the future.", + "reference": "This change shouldn't be included with this push. Shouldn't push version changes with a pull-request." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add a header to the response.", + "reference": "nit: let's move this right under where we create the `responseWriter`, before `h.callHandler`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "The way it was implemented, needed to pass the template values. Please check whether we want this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Just FYI we need this to align with `builtin.EpochDurationSeconds` from specs-actors or the state machine computations will be off. We'll need to turn this into a config option and follow the same monkey patching paths as the min miner size, seal proof types etc. The EpochDurationSeconds is currently a `const` so can't do it yet tho." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Is this import needed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add padding here.", + "reference": "Dashboard stories also need to have the default padding." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.", + "reference": "Is there a reason why we wouldn't use this as the default?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "if there is an tag of the same name?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "I'd add `// +build go1.10` to prevent from accidentally compiling with older Go." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Not sure how this import relates to the PR but seems like a good idea anyway..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a separate file, not a separate file.", + "reference": "Hmm this is strange, why should the SettingsStruct import something from `WebServer`? If that's really needed, then we must move stuff as it makes no sense to have some code related to viewing things included in a settings struct. It should be the other way around." + }, + { + "prediction": "???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????)????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????", + "reference": "nit: Space between these lines." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why aggregator should have this translator? It's Selenium specifics for now..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it is necessary for skipping functionality.", + "reference": "I don't understand why this function is needed? Can't you just pass the information when the `DocComparator` is created in the SortField?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This rescue is repeated exactly in `app/jobs/mailchimp_removal_job.rb`. Could we extract a method and pull it up into `MailChimpJob` for reuse?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "It's not directly related to this PR, but it would be nice to flow the original error as we're going to print that if the promise is rejected and it'll be more informative than the vague `Network request failed`. Also, I'm not a js dev, so maybe I'm wrong, but throwing a TypeError feels a bit odd." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to get the path from `WLR_XWAYLAND_PATH`?", + "reference": "Can we print a debug message when this is used? Since it's a debugging variable, I wouldn't want users to have issues because of a left-over env." + }, + { + "prediction": "Do we need this?", + "reference": "Should we have an avatar, truncate, etc examples, too?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "could you add this to `docs/source/reference/indexing.rst`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "Why the change from rdkit.six to six?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to extractPathExpressions here.", + "reference": "Looking good, let's just move this inside the `if` to avoid doing the extra work if we don't need it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.", + "reference": "I think we should change this to an instanceOf check for MongoBatchReExecutionError" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Required by the libcalico-go changes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Explain why we don't reuse the corresponding server error locally?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((())))))))))))))))))(((((((()))))))", + "reference": "@JayanthyChengan This change is still missing (and should be last one!): change this line to call getDateToDisplayOnCard(), that way the logic is in only one place (that method)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this error was removed.", + "reference": "What was wrong with more concrete error?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think it would be better to have a function that returns a list of classes.", + "reference": "can you replace the tabs with 2 spaces please to match the rest of the project?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why are we adding it to the integral function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Same for this file" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Looks good! But why it's still a out parameter? We can refactor the whole tree because it's internal?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((-(------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "probably better to use `wlr_seat_keyboard_end_grab()`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the transaction pool.", + "reference": "Such a large test impact for such a little 3 line change ;)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.", + "reference": "Is the `cascade` necessary? It should work also without the casdade, because Payments are always already persisted when use cases with them. If it doesn't work, please tell me the reason. It is as same in Transport." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This is not very short. I'm not sure sure if there's a system for assigning shortcodes to issues." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this annotation should be used.", + "reference": "We should probably prefix this with `acme-http01` to bring it in-line with other annotations, e.g. `certmanager.k8s.io/acme-http01-edit-in-place`. It's quite wordy, but it *is* more specific (and I'd hope more obvious to the user what it is for?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "No need to add this file change for this PR. Please remove it." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "this extra dot at the end is causing a couple tests to fail on Travis" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a local variable, but I don't think it should be a local variable.", + "reference": "Did you try using `global` with a regular integer?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "windows size might be off" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This should still be guarded with an `#ifdef` since the DataMan code will only be supported for shared lib builds." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "thanks for cleaning up these old length checks" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "What will be logged when the `Input.Namespace` was not specified?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I wouldn't expose this until the feature is ready. We are most likely to cut releases while still in development" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "I don't think we should pull aria-query into axe-core at this point. There's a much simpler fix for this. Please don't overthink it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug, and I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "@ejsmith What if instead of making these two methods public we made it a partial class and moved them to a separate file so that file could be part of the include list? I bring it up just because I don't think it is a very nice API that was ever intended to be public? I think they are only called by a couple of other very internal-y spots. /cc @reyang" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "would be good to turn these into constants." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Seems like it should be `generated by Wire` here and in the SUT?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I know the main cases show up in the daemon test already but a little bit more unit test coverage would be nice and probably not too annoying to set up. Ideas: 1. Verify that the string \"no duplicates\" is in the LastDuplicate field when we propose a new deal. 2. Verify that proposing a duplicate deal fails when the duplicates boolean is set false. 3. Start out in a state with more than 1 duplicates. Verify that the LastDuplicate field is set to the last duplicate when we propose with a true duplicates bool." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this. I'm not sure how to fix this.", + "reference": "`Timeout.Infinite` is actually `-1`. Here the correct message can be taken from Line:67." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "I think we need `#if!SILVERLIGHT` here and at the test." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Can you change this import to the apache dependency? I didn't even know that jgit contains such a method..." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Four strings in a row makes me nervous, can we use an arguments struct instead? Or reuse the struct I recommend in the reconciler." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this option is a good option.", + "reference": "should work with no options, if my suggestion is accepted. JSON is the one that gets weird since a JSON object appended to a JSON object isn't valid JSON." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I presume this isn't some special term..." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Did you mean to return here? ;) You'll also need to add an `incomplete` message to the rule metadata." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.", + "reference": "Why are we calling these as annotations? I guess this is an old type that we are re-using. But lets make it a point to avoid once we feel that this design/code is not good." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`invocation.getInvocationStageTrace().startSend()` is inside `RestClientSender.send`" + }, + { + "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid", + "reference": "use \"actionHash\" to be consistent with other places" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "Can we derive `Class` by looking at one of the label choices, if at least one is always provided? Given these are immutable, a real-world case for an empty enumerations eludes me." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "I am now confused here, the spec says > If format is VK_FORMAT_UNDEFINED, all members of samplerYcbcrConversionComponents must be the identity swizzle. The spec also says > samplerYcbcrConversionComponents is the component swizzle that **should** be used in VkSamplerYcbcrConversionCreateInfo. so you are allowed to set the swizzle to anything I want, so I guess this is valid usage here... but now I am more curious if I have an external format does it not have to follow any component swizzle rules and can be anything regardless of the `ycbcrModel`? (I guess really a question for @critsec and is not a blocking concern for the scope of this PR)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "I'd say the error should be an error, not instructions to the user. So error would be something like \"site should be running and is not\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Thanks for this PR @pinzon! Rather than resetting the `sms_messages` list, can we fix the assertion in line 902 - rather than asserting `len` equality, we should assert that all expected messages are contained in the list. (In this case the phone numbers should be reasonably random, and ideally we should not have duplicates across different tests). We're planning to introduce test parallelization in the near future, and this will help us avoiding undesired side-effects. Thanks" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error log.", + "reference": "Some weird blocks formation again." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "This is worrisome." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "nit try rephrasing to something like \" AutoFilesystemTrimUsage returns the volume usage and trimmable space of locally mounted pxd volumes\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "currently the puppet-agent package doesn't symlink files into /opt/puppetlabs/bin. Also many puppet acceptance tests that execute on Unix assume puppetbindir is a single directory (windows doesn't have this issue). So I think if we want to unblock testing, this should just be changed to `h['puppetbindir'] = '/opt/puppetlabs/puppet/bin`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "any point in keeping this here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "I don't think we need this check. Instead `Entries.merge` should check that its argument is correctly sorted (in addition to the existing pre/post check on the method receiver)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This is not really good to mix different code bases. @TheMarex I understand the point about placing code into cpp file, but we still need to move templated version into an impl header, remove references to offline code here and keep template instantiations in a cpp file to avoid rebuild. So offline code could instantiate own implementations using private impl headers. Otherwise we again make wrong dependencies into OSRM code and block changes in separate projects." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Then, where is it removed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should test caseSensitivePath.", + "reference": "The tests are not run concurrently? (I don't know. Better check.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate file. I don't think that's a good way to do it.", + "reference": "Regardless of scale?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "Nit: should not we hide them from printing out?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `ImageToTensor`.", + "reference": "What is the reason to modify those things? I noticed it breaks the examples using `asyncio`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "WHOOOOOOOPS! so this is a wire protocol breaking change. I deployed a dev version of yarpc 1.9 to demo-yarpc-go and it caused bad request errors because it couldn't determine the procedure anymore. (in coordination with yarpc-prober)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "if we keep this, can we stick to our convention of using UPPER_CASE for constants? Otherwise this looks like a floating variable to me." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "You probably don't want to assume that `self.underlayer` has a `seq` attribute." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "This apparently breaks the language selection." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this migration.", + "reference": "since we're not using mysql, do we need this migration?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in sync with the above!", + "reference": "i'm not sure about htis naming here. both the word partition and adjustment are very ambiguous and it's not clear what it does. i would maybe go for something less generic and more concrete like `GOV_CLOUD_SUPPORT`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a ConcurrentHashMap, not a ConcurrentHashMap.", + "reference": "unfinishedFlows might not be the same as activeFlows. Will it cause confusion here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Same, remove the error handling." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We should not change this at this time." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "We may also update the docstring in the AnchorGenerator's arguments at around line 15." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "FormatHandle isn't current typesafe w.r.t. requiring *VULKAN* handles... so this slipped through." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "What kind of dependency is here, I think we have own implementation of event wo external dependencies" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Throw an exception instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to create a new `org` instance in the `create_last_month_created_plan` method.", + "reference": "we shouldn't need the `FactoryBot.` in these. Ok to leave for now since all of these specs have them. Can clean up later" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FileBase` class, so that we don't have to change the `FileBase` class.", + "reference": "Isn't the better option to actually do `$this->getDisk()->url($uploadsPath)` without changing the filesystems config? Not sure why you think that change is required but it's definitely not getting merged." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "Not sure if we need this. It's not tested because it only guards against a new conditional definition of a dunder method in a built-in package. I am fine with leaving it out." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `PushToBlobFeed.cs` file. I think it would be better to move this to the `PushToBlobFeed.cs` file.", + "reference": "Is this the only task in this library? If so this is good, if not then we should do it for each task." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to get the count of cstorvolume based on volume replica.", + "reference": "I am not sure what is 120 and what is 10. Hence unable to review." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Not needed anymore" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Please not abbreviations" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to override the retry state here.", + "reference": "This shouldn't get stomped over on line 207" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "are they not 1-indexed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to checkTimestamp here. I don't think we need to checkTimestamp here.", + "reference": "I know that previously this check was here but @ralph-pichler replaced it with the `CheckTimestamp` field stating that checking against `Timestamp` was incorrect. @ralph-pichler can you elaborate?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "`short_version = __version__`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the API to update the status of an access key for AWS Identity and Access Management (AWS IAM) user.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Required for the SparkDataFile SerDe" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Do you want to make this an assertion instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This file is covered by the GNU General Public License.", + "reference": "When updating the copyright, we tend to cover previous years, not just the current. So, if we started the file in 2015, we'd update to say 2015-2016. I'm not sure if there's a legal requirement surrounding this, but it's the convention we and many others have adopted for code." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we should do that.", + "reference": "Wait, so it looks like this function is called _every_ time we fetch the root node, i.e. we do an MD head fetch every time we fetch the root node? Not for this PR, but it seems like we should make that unnecessary, since this function only ever does anything when head is `nil`, i.e. the first time. Maybe add a TODO?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why are you changing this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to handle multiple services here and not sure how to handle multiple services and we get config from communication channel where service type is not know yet.", + "reference": "`json.RawMessage` is a `[]byte`, which is already a pointer. Why do we need to have pointer here if we just reading this value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "should we actually switch to `All` or just add `0.4.0` explicitly to the list of supported CNI versions? What is a new CNI version is released?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I think it should be `firewall_rule_dao`.", + "reference": "pylint might complain that this isn't alphasorted?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "It seems that NetworkService is behind a feature flag because it's still experimental. If we see new issues, we should look at flipping this back off." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `RUNNING` or `RUNNING` or `RUNNING` or `RUNNING`?", + "reference": "I think it makes more sense to have this be a method on TaskStatus. Also, nit, Backend, not BackEnd." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is this a bug?", + "reference": "Could you please elaborate on why you need all this magic here? In which cases do you want the same id to be returned? Does this work the same way for all backends?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate file for this.", + "reference": "nit: `PluginConfigs` feels a little better" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "think we need to find out the root-cause and fix, instead of just removing `NoError`? it erred b/c `context canceled`, so call this before context cancelled is the right fix" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?", + "reference": "Please expand \"later behavior\". Presumably something to do with the prefetch logic?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "The `response` variable is not used, it can be removed, also the fmt.Errorf." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Do you find this really easier to read?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.", + "reference": "A small nit: This variable should start with a lower case letter." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Where is this used for Node?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Is `` really easier to understand than `` for CLI user? For me, `identity` seems like a concept we use publicly, and `id` is just an internal shortcut for it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "nit.. `if`.. `else` for logging probably can be avoided.. maybe only log that an internal group was created for cluster group" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import this file.", + "reference": "There's a lot of changed tests -- but no new tests. You need unit and integration tests for this." + }, + { + "prediction": "is not possible?", + "reference": "WithMessage what gas limit is?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why are these skipped?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "We'd better add the `json:\"metaServer,omitempty\"` here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "So... when we want to install mitmproxy with pinned dependencies, we first install all pinned dependencies, and then in a second step install mitmproxy as editable, making sure that no additional dependencies are sneaking in." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "not sure how this got in master, but the linter is unhappy about it so I fixed it here" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "No need for this TODO anymore, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future. I don't think we need this in the future, but I don't think we need it in the future.", + "reference": "I would assign the key you're looking for into a variable first, and then use it in the comparisons." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should remove the plugin from our internal container. I don't think we should remove the plugin from our internal container.", + "reference": "Would be better to normalize it at the start of the method to pass through to all the other calls" + }, + { + "prediction": "is safe mode?", + "reference": "This can't exist here either because the code editor can be used on other models than CMS templates. You could probably implement this as a `hint` property (so `hint: cms::lang.cms_object.safe_mode_enabled`) on the codeeditor formwidget instead though and I'd be fine with that." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This line is unnecessary." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "How did this compile in the first place? Is there a matching declaration in a header that should be removed too?" + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Please remove the colon at the end, and merge the PR once the CI succeeds. Thank you for the PR." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "whoops. this should be protoc-gen-doc, since that is the only bit left that is built out-of-tree (everything else is either downloaded or built via modules already depended on by spire's go.mod)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this interface to `KafkaAvroEventReporter` class.", + "reference": "The convention is to use

    see the google style guide and use checkstyle to check. You can change it later." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Using non-keyword args after the keyword arg (parent-self) will cause a SyntaxError." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think you'll want to add some YARD docs to this method to get the PR approved" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Hmm, AFAICT `*out_variant` isn't explicitly set to `NULL` in the `ENOENT` case." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.", + "reference": "Nit: \"Failed to configure TLS for SDK client\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change the title here.", + "reference": "please update your branch to the latest `master`. This change was already made in #4359" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.", + "reference": "This line should be formatted" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((( i( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i", + "reference": "\"default 65536\" Not sure if it's important to state, but block_processor_full_size has a different default for fast_bootstrap." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "remove unnecessary whitespace changes" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Are these conditions covered elsewhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.", + "reference": "the above check (by transitivity) checked for `in_data.name_id == out_data.name_id && in_data.name_id!= EMPTY_NAME_ID && out_data.name_id!= EMPTY_NAME_ID`. The final check of `out_data.name_id!= EMPTY_NAME_ID` is missing now." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this check into a separate function, so that we don't have to worry about it.", + "reference": "The event handle is being passed by reference, so the dereference on 591 is actually correct. To follow the convention that variables be declared before executable statements, please change the code to the following: struct _fpga_event_handle *_eh; fpga_result result = FPGA_OK; int err = 0; if (!event_handle) { return FPGA_INVALID_PARAM; } _eh = (struct _fpga_event_handle *) *event_handle;" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be included in the `plugins/map_matching.hpp` file.", + "reference": "reorder includes to be alphabetically ordered" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `anchor_target` function.", + "reference": "Rename `need_unmap` to `unmap`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "In line 28, it has been declared twice, so removing `cm` should not impact, can you explain me little bit? :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to acquireTopologyCacheLock() here.", + "reference": "i don't think these unexported functions belong on the public interface, they can exist solely on the struct." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I'm not entirely clear on why this is necessary?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a cast.", + "reference": "Why do we need to cast to `str` here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a test, but I don't think it's a test. I think it's a test, but I don't think it's a test.", + "reference": "The ignore import above should be unused now and can be removed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.", + "reference": "redundant null check?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "initialization of available ram is here" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Can have negative numbers with the '-' on the right (`10-`) by just using line 610." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.", + "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Shouldn't we use store a message which indicates that there was no available checker command? By the way how is it possible that metadata.json doesn't contain the checker command? Maybe this was the case in the earlier versions?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Given that this is a boolean predicate, maybe it should be `full_backtrace?`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to import ldap from django.contrib.auth.models", + "reference": "Just curious why the blank line here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "I like the idea, but we don't want a dependency on mitmproxy in pathod." + }, + { + "prediction": "We're keeping this as the string representation.", + "reference": "Why not adding this to the interface and keep passing the interface (as the interface is internal I don't get why you're not adding it there)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "`PY310` should probably be imported from `pylint.const`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should return true if we don't have an error.", + "reference": "Can we propagate this error up the stack?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Why reference is converted to table?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////", + "reference": "You shouldn't use assert for runtime errors." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Does this really belong in the vendor directory if you wrote it? At very least, should it get its own repo somewhere in addition to being dropped here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it would be better to place the rule name before the message. Messages are of varying lengths and the rule names will end up misaligned" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Can we remove the argument from this message? A message will include a line number already that points to the place in the code that has the problem. I think we can remove it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a virtual method. I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "This whole class is now a mix of virtual and non-virtual. I tried to see what would happen if I made everything non-virtual in dev, and the build still passes. It turns out that none of the other methods actually need to be virtual. Can you make *all* the logging methods either virtual or not for consistency? Thanks." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.", + "reference": "This looks a bit cryptic to me, and also it contains a dash. How about `mymysterium.url`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should print the value.", + "reference": "You did notice the no newline at the end of this file, right?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Here's the object model change. `CodeFlows` is a set of objects of type `CodeFlow`, rather than a list of list of `AnnotatedCodeLocation`. Exactly parallel with `Stacks`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Sorry, one more thing... You should use `app.config` instead of importing it directly. See the code below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "This was correct before; \"setup\" is a noun and \"set up\" is the verb form." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "What's the reason for this change here? I didn't see it mentioned in the PR and it's a bit of a confusing param name" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "I wonder why ~ and not a wildcard instead?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.", + "reference": "when will this happened? if happened, just ignore it Silently?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.", + "reference": "3x the smaller size would be around 17k, and we need it to be at least about 13k, which is 2x the larger size. I'd probably set this to 15k to split the difference and hopefully avoid needing to update this again as tests change. This is minor, though." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.", + "reference": "@scottpurdy, strictly speaking, should this scenario raise a ValueError exception instead of AssertionError?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this enum.", + "reference": "Can you please add open source disclaimer?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I dont want to do composite keys on purpose to verify at compile time if the message is completely filled out appropriately @sectioneight" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "don't need this line, since it is not tested in api_test?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Does this mean the list operation is done for all the namespaces? How to list the volume replicas per namespace?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a `if not class_agnostic`", + "reference": "I suggest adding `class_agnostic` as an argument of `batched_nms()`, with the default value False." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.", + "reference": "@rdblue, did we not add the name on purpose?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the enum.", + "reference": "Why is this now public?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I guess we should backport some deprecation for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Moving this code inside the last case statement doesn't seem right. Why are we defining `name` and `is_relative` variables there if we aren't using them anywhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I would say just change REGARG: no need for a separate thing." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "we can remove this template, it is no longer in use" + }, + { + "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]", + "reference": "This doesn't look like it has as much coverage of the recursive code as it once did." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `awsLoadBalancerSpec` struct.", + "reference": "Do we actually expect users to provide more information here than possibly a SecurityGroup ID? If not, then this should probably use a new type, otherwise users might be confused by what options would be respected/ignored when used in this context." + }, + { + "prediction": ":::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;", + "reference": "This seems like a new dependency on rometools. Do we need it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.", + "reference": "Waiting for the pull takes a long time. This message informs the user that at least one of the images being pulled is available. Please leave." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I can not think in a good use for it, but may we allow a way to setup a fake with a hook for logs? this fake is special, and we may need access to some of thoe logs, at the same time it may be an overkill because we dont want to test \"sql\" implementation but results.. but we can create some tests with end to end logs in some scenaries, What do you think about it?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I don't think you should be changing the dag unilaterally at parse time. If cores isn't specified, then it isn't specified." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Instead of just \"See SubscriberOptions....\", say something like \"Use... to choose between the two.\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Use with statement for `f`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.", + "reference": "It's a small style point, but could you remove the \"extra\" space before the colon that precedes the return type? This would make it more closely match the prevailing style in these tests and in the standard libraries." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "seems clunky to me to have an `MDOps` interface method that some implementations don't implement. Perhaps define a separate interface, like, `BranchResolver`, and then callers that have an `MDOps` object can check via type assertion?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `WebElement` interface.", + "reference": "This change should also probably go into the corresponding method of the abstract By class?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (from `gofmt`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "This is likely to return an error value if the client fails to read the response we write, which is why I chose to ignore this error." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "this method is not used" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.", + "reference": "Right now it's a bit unclear that this needs to be called explicitly by the implementing class. If, for example, there's another backend, it won't get this update unless we add the same function as webkit. Could you either add a note to this docstring explaining that this needs to be called, or find some way to automatically trigger this so the webkit override isn't needed (and some override passed on webengine)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this change.", + "reference": "Why this change (test name still says \"must pass with metadata\")?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Another nitpick: parens around the arg pretty please" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This spec can be modified, giving you extra strength (Check this fetch key doesn't work and therefore returns `nil`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Oh, I guess I mentioned/pressed this point in the other issue, that this should probably go into the httpserver package. In fact, so should the const above this (URLPathCtxKey). These are specific to the HTTP server." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Not added by you, but we don't really need the '5' here.." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The vendor prefix is still being used on Chromium based browsers like Edge Chromium and Chrome. Did you mean to remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\")\")\")\")\"))\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",", + "reference": "I don't think this is needed anymore?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Should this be a helper function?", + "reference": "This is the only occurrence I see in the code where we now need to convert from a boolean protobuf wrapper to a boolean pointer. This felt a little cumbersome here; should we consider moving it somewhere else as a helper function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((", + "reference": "Need you to delete the `version_` from `HostInfo` struct?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `baseLang(node.getAttribute('xml:lang') || '') || '' || '' || '') || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || '' || ''", + "reference": "This could be the cleanest looking check we've got. Great job Jey." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Who invited yoda? In all seriousness though, wouldn't an `if (empty())` be better here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.", + "reference": "You can use `appRouter.goHome` to do this (It's defined in site.js), it's less hacky than overriding the href." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "When could this happen?" + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((( code code code code code code int code int code int code int code int int code int line int code int", + "reference": "I assume this was removed because it was redundant? and conflicted with the now dynamic contentType? Edit: Oh I see it being set was moved to the `PostSegmentAsync` call." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Here is a newline missing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "Did you mean to make this http rather than https?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This file is covered by the GNU General Public License.", + "reference": "The updated copyright header should be: # Copyright (C) 2006-2018 NV Access Limited, yourname" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this. I don't think we should have a test for this.", + "reference": "wow :+1:, i do not even know how this test works." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "File should be renamed `PlugIn` -> `Plugin`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future. I'm not sure why we need this in the future, but I'm not sure why we need this in the future.", + "reference": "I scanned the new test cases quickly. Do we have one for an egressIPPool with multiple different IP ranges?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "you can use a different name, like `maybe_activate` or `is_active` without `component` in the method name as this is used in the class name. E.g: `$component->should_component_be_active` is using twice the `component` word" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I think this might not be a complete enough check: what if `options` is `null`/`undefined`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Useless assignment to variable - `user`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be `${TRAVIS_HOME}/erlang.tar.bz2`, not `${TRAVIS_HOME}/erlang.tar.bz2`.", + "reference": "I think we would want to keep `-O` instead. I wonder how this worked before, though." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "another alternate option which doesn't have the risk of too many entries (when user keeps providing keys in different order) Have the dictionary as before If tagKeys lookup fail, sort and lookup again. If fails, insert both original tagKeys and its sorted one to the dictionary. So that we only store atmost 2 entries per key set. And we only do a single lookup in hotpath, as opposed to 2 look ups." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "if (out!= nullptr)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "In the listenstore you catch the exception and then pass it on via Raise. However, here you do not catch the exception. You should catch the exception, but since this is a minor aspect of this page, perhaps show an error message when the count cannot be loaded in time. Then the rest of the page can still be rendered, rather than failing the whole page." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "wouldn't it be simpler to just add `or transfer` here? That way the more complicated set of conditionals down below don't have to get more clauses." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))falsefalsefalsefalsefalse))))))))))))))))))))))))))))falsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalse))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "ditto; please fix everywhere" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a new option.", + "reference": "Can you break this line into two parts - the first line makes the option help text for `--sftp-server` and its too long! `Specifies the path or command to run a sftp server on the remote host. The subsystem option is ignored when sftp_server is defined.`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "I reverted that one in a previous PR because of a CI failure but it was actually unrelated" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "The for loop is useless here, since any error will make the function return." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "Fix file endings here and elsewhere." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "I'd better increase `buf` length to MAXPATHLEN and not cut p->get_project_name() output twice" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should print the error.", + "reference": "Please remove the prints, even though this code will be trashed." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Not sure if you added deliberately but I've seen these popping up; is goimports adding them?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "I think we might need some special handling for `Spec.ControlPlaneLoadBalancer.SecurityGroups`, it looks like we are currently only handling the case that `Spec.ControlPlaneLoadBalancer` is nil." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a dict.", + "reference": "Is this from a third-party library?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Please put the `el.tabIndex > -1` in the first part of the expression. The matcher will run on every node on the page, so we should put the fastest part first." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this file.", + "reference": "`identity` is unused now, is it for future usage?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())", + "reference": "This would have assisted me a lot! I am on the \"functions\" page more than any other page in the docs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "I think it's better we keep `(` and encode with default encoding (utf-8)." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "this is gonna be different in an IDE vs from gradlew??" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Do we not already have something for isolating syntax?" + }, + { + "prediction": "This file is part of Invenio.", + "reference": "1: D100 Docstring missing 4: I102 copyright year is outdated, expected 2014 but got 2012 158: D103 Docstring missing 168: D101 Docstring missing 170: D102 Docstring missing 180: D102 Docstring missing 187: D102 Docstring missing" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `aws-sdk-s3` file.", + "reference": "how **to** deny" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "The only beef I have with this is that it's app domain global." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can you link to the GitHub issue and/or PR so that it is easy for future readers to find out more about this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "Typical to report the value found as well as the valid bounds." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "maybe we want 0 as a default value?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "can we get height from sf at very beginning of the function and use that as height of the block?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Does this have to be public and in the primary namespace?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.", + "reference": "I'm a bit confused. Doesn't `mdWriterLock` already synchronizes calls to this function?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Does it make sense to generate a dailyMotion url without the video reference? It does not to me, but can we throw an exception here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why the separation of imports here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Random extra newline." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `getFocusableElements` method.", + "reference": "No need for this variable." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Why not use `msg` directly below?" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "I think other places changed to use `Deque` instead of suppressing the warning." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "missing: utility, cstddef also: vector is already included in the header (interface requires vectors as in/out types)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "I'm not sure this is necessary in the config here, as Jest would be setting the global `fetchMock = ''`. See below." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Can `mFolder == null` happen during regular operations? Or is it only so we can be lazy in tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.", + "reference": "I'd suggest using the actual MIME types here - so `text/plain` and `multipart/alternative` or does that cause problems with what postgres allows for enumeration names? If so then maybe just replace the slash with an underscore?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Ohh. `TeamName` is actually a \"friendly\" name displayed in the Catalog - not the name used in the CLI. So I guess we'll need a new variable here. (That is, this is going to be mainly a `quilt.yaml` change. You won't need the `.lower()`, though.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.", + "reference": "Nit: Don't move it between `require_dummy_response` definition and usage, this can live above or below :)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "With the current code, it not work if `EnableCatchupFromArchiveServers` is disabled. to fix it: in getDNSAddrs, change the predicate to `if wn.config.EnableCatchupFromArchiveServers || wn.config. EnableCatchupFromArchiveServers {` and in the catchup/service.go and catchup/catchpointService.go, use the `PeersPhonebookArchivers` only when `wn.config.EnableCatchupFromArchiveServers` is enabled." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why not make `SearchForNodes` do a `GetOrCreate` for the root node? (Not advocating for it, but just wondering if there's another reason than avoiding having to pass in the path.)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": ":+1: amazing that this has been missing since it was originally implemented" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))", + "reference": "Just want to note here that although we do check `length` while writing to choose whether to close and start a new file, that doesn't happen for ORC already so it is fine to use a FS call in this method." + }, + { + "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "nit: I feel multiple `if (...) { return... }` is more readable than `if... else...`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?", + "reference": "This is needed for us to work in IDE UTs" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.", + "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "this `label=` is docker specific, while here in libcontainer there shouldn't be any mention to docker. `DisableSecOpt` and `DupSecOpt` should just deal with `disable,role,type,level`. Both CRI-O and docker should just pass `disable,role,type.level` stuff and not `label=...`." + }, + { + "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "You need to declare variable `recurse` above, same place as `localTime`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Why does `clone` not already copy `xdensity` and `ydensity` from what it is cloning?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the meter source to the list of meter sources.", + "reference": "Curious - do we do the same for traces (when no ActivitySource / legacy source are added)? (and why we want to do it for metrics?)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do it.", + "reference": "@aimanrosli23 For the changes in file SdMmcPciHci.c, please make sure that you do not revert the changes made by the below commits: SHA-1: 49accdedf956f175041040e677163b7cbb746283 * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Hook SwitchClockFreq after SD clock start SHA-1: c67617f3c677c342efde780e229f841f4e0f6c7e * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Add retries for sync commands SHA-1: 6d387610855ee27b49cb720de29ed809ea59dadc * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Read response on command completion SHA-1: 63fd7f389874081ea37452b1f79ac013d52755e3 * MdeModulePkg/SdMmcPciHcDxe: Do not map memory for non DMA transfer" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add `input type=\"text\" />` to this test.", + "reference": "You'll also need to add `webelem.Group.all` everywhere as that matches as well" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate function.", + "reference": "Does this need to be an ERB template?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `SubmitFeedback` method. I think we should add it to the `SubmitFeedback` method in the `SubmitFeedback` method.", + "reference": "do we want to register this in the mock server for testing?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.", + "reference": "shouldnt this be `0:996` (+4) so the 1000s below fit?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to have a `MultiDimensionalMapping.sort()` method.", + "reference": "The docstring of this context_manager should be updated. As now ``sort=False`` is valid, it should just say it disables sorting regardless of whether the NdMapping has ``sort=True`` or ``sort=False``. I also think the line 'Should only be used if values are guaranteed to be sorted before or after the operation is performed.' should just say something else - maybe just that the initial ordering (whatever it is) should be preserved?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "This tests failed unless I swapped the order here. Perhaps some new class transform broke the old form?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "extract the port and set to `debug_java_port`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "When the argument list is `[\"one\", \"two three\"]` then you concatenate it as you do it here, you won't be able to get the original list back with split. You need to annotate the list items better. (Or if you won't do the split by yourself, the called shell will do it. So you need shell escaping. How portable is that?) The main driver to change this in `intercept-build` was to get rid of these concatenation and splitting errors. The current compilation database parser in Clang understands the `arguments` filed... So the question, why don't you pass the command around as a list instead of a string?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "`ctx` is unused in EnablePiped" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Why do we have both a list of valid sessions and an instance variable if a session is destroyed?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "nit : I think that it would be \"cleaner\" to set the `flushcount` to nil in case of an error nice catch ;-)" + }, + { + "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################", + "reference": "You may want to use assertNull" + }, + { + "prediction": "\"))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Break out tests for events into their own tests rather than placing them in other ones. That makes it easier for us to figure out where problems lie and to do a TDD-driven implementation over new APIs." + }, + { + "prediction": "error:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::", + "reference": "Why did you remove this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.", + "reference": "Why we need another error printouts? We already have it inside addMapping.." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))) ()) () ( ( # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #", + "reference": "This LGTM, but I'm curious if this fixed a specific error you were hitting?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Actually we rely on this functionality in cgroup v2, where the subsystem is empty." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "suggestion: use `core` package name" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I think we can entirely remove this `limit` parameter for now to be consistent with other APIs." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the `start_moto_server` function.", + "reference": "nit: `Resource Groups Tagging API` -> `Resource Groups API`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk-go/aws-sdk", + "reference": "This type of list + delete always make me a bit uneasy but guess there's no atomic way to do this...... Could you put a todo to retry the \"ClearRepository + delete repo\" flow a few times? Basically, imagine a new image is added right after we call `ListImages`, then `DeleteImages` will not delete that newly added image. Then the delete repo call will fail" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "You can remove this since ES6 modules are strict by default. And thanks for contributing to the Jellyfin Project." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.", + "reference": "Why did eip1559 go from a list (0xf9020280.....) to a wrapped string (0xb902060ff9020280...) and not just concatenation (0x0ff9020280...)? implementation detail or is this how it sits on the wire now?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "@wallyqs Since on Windows it would be `\\` instead of `/` I just look at the suffix past `configs/`. Let me know if that's ok or not." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `GetInsightData` method.", + "reference": "nit: Remove this assignment because it is not necessary." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This seems like a common enough pattern to offer an equivalent wrapper in `ot-fs-util.c`, no?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Media` class. I don't think we should move this into the `Media` class. I think we should move this into the `Media` class. I think we should move the `Media` class into the `Media` class. I think we should move the `Media` class into the `Media` class. I think we should move the `Media` class into the `Media` class. I think we should move the `Media` class into the `Media` class. I think we should move the `Media` class into the `Media` class. I think we should move the `Media` class into the `Media` class.", + "reference": "Wouldn't this crash the app if the user is currently listening to a stream?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "This looks like an unrelated change? What is it for?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Wait, what is this doing? Is this a way to create methods that are only accessible from tests?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "Is it more reasonable to return some errors here, such as returning error codes (403 and so on?)?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Thinking out loud... would `_nextDom` be a better name for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.", + "reference": "Turns out the unittests also had a false positive." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))", + "reference": "I think these method names would be clearer if written as \"Create a {type} counter|gauge|measure with given name\". eg \"Create a int64 counter with given name\" \"Create a double gauge with given name\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())", + "reference": "it pushes a boolean, so it has to be explicitly casted to boolean with!= nullptr, same with all other similar stuff" + }, + { + "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"", + "reference": "It would be nice to have an equivalent of this call on `DataWriterImpl::enable`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "Isn't this PENDING?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "minor detail, why aim to sanitize title if tile is empty (in some cases)? worth adding an && to check for that." + }, + { + "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"", + "reference": "Code shared by ParentChildrenSyncDownTarget and ParentChildrenSyncUpTarget moved to ParentChildrenSyncTargetHelper" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "The bug is not about the priority, But we use 2 config items CAPACITY and SEQUENTIAL to control 1 action: thoughput. If'sequential' is given to 'False' as default in configfile and then I use 'capacity' to 10 in my test.yml, the 'capacity''s priority should be higher than default'sequential'. So, I suggest we use only one 'capacity', it is enough. '1' is sequential, more than 1 is capacity, None is sys.maxsize." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.", + "reference": "I don't know if I'd call any of these FAST tests integration tests. They are unit tests for FAST. They use a mock plugin which doesn't actually start any external processes, etc." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Can you provide corresponding UT for this." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this in the future.", + "reference": "nit: this should be below the yarpc group" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "singleCaseSwitch: should rewrite switch statement to if statement (from `gocritic`)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.", + "reference": "Please log once here at Error level \"Failed to connect to Typha, will retry...\"" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should keep this test in a separate PR.", + "reference": "Do we need the forXDP parameter in runBpfUnitTest? If not, I think better to revert in order to save a few changes." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "So we fix it only for kinto and not for all cliquet resources?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "No empty line between" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "We have `ResolveRootfs` in `libcontainer/utils` so maybe use that one here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ValidateSwagger` method. I don't think we should add this to the `ValidateSwagger` method. I think we should add the `ValidateSwagger` method to the `ValidateSwagger` method and add the `ValidateSwagger` method to the `ValidateSwagger` method.", + "reference": "Just curious, do we have positive test covered somewhere?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should move resize resize resizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResizeResize", + "reference": "Style error, put a space between `if` and `(`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "It's a bit odd to have a \"disable\" boolean, though it looks like you already do that for a few other flags." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "Why did you pick two hours for this?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the password here.", + "reference": "What about \"enter new password\"? That would be a bit more consistent to the `ReadPasswordTwice` usage in cmd_init." + }, + { + "prediction": "Please add a new error message.", + "reference": "Another redundant import" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need to release the stream?", + "reference": "What kind of errors might cause us to reach this point? Could any of them be recoverable i.e. might work if we asked the same server again? Similar question for below, but perhaps with a slightly different answer" + }, + { + "prediction": "Why not use `graph_type` instead?", + "reference": "What is the difference between GraphType and graph_type. Naming should be more accurate." + }, + { + "prediction": "Doctrine\\ORM\\EntityManagerInterface should be removed.", + "reference": "hmmm in docblock of contructor it is EntityManagerInterface....maybe it should be that way.... :confused:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I'm curious why you went the route of adding a new method name for this. Given that you it would be possible to just have an an overload of `GetPos()`, and that this change breaks existing code, I wonder why you chose to go this way." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the future.", + "reference": "Does this need to change `'active'` to `'Active'` and that? Or is that done in CSS or something?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "Why are these constants public? They should also be listed above members." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "This TODO isn't related to this change. We should remove it." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.", + "reference": "`FieldMetrics` is parameterized, but this is a bare reference. Could you update it? I think it should be `FieldMetrics` since the metrics are not necessarily for the written value type, `D`." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need this.", + "reference": "@cijothomas do we want this to be `Set` or `Add`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))))))))))))((((((((-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "Why are we dropping GasCap?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure why we'd want to throw an exception if the span is not valid. I'm not sure what you're trying to do, but I think it's better to throw an exception if the span is not valid.", + "reference": "should we end the text with a.?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.", + "reference": "Could this instead keep the `go_native` and add to it \"or the last exit was the special reset exit\"?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.", + "reference": "Oh, I missed this one: The other instances of `this` you've added as lambda contexts aren't really needed, although they're harmless. However, in the above connection, the missing context is `panel`, not `this`. Please correct it! Clazy may show warnings about lambda contexts (I don't use Clazy) but, if so, that's a problem in clazy: it isn't smart enough to know about them." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "can we add a try / except around this to make it more stable? I like the idea of any mistakenly un-quit drivers closing down after the process is quit (the java server does this... also i forget to do driver.quit often when i use the command line repl :) )" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.", + "reference": "when would this happen? backward compatibility?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.", + "reference": "I'm not sure what the value of this is. So far we've solved this by always doing `tagName.toUpperCase()` for everything. I think we should stick with this." + }, + { + "prediction": "This command displays status of available snapshot.", + "reference": "This command displays available snapshots on a volume." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.", + "reference": "`spb` is the standard package name we use for this proto." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------", + "reference": "/javascript/firefox-driver is the Selenium implementation of a WebDriver for Firefox. Since it generally isn't W3C compatible, it shouldn't change. We can just drop this change." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `process` function.", + "reference": "is this pr support parallelly process application?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Based on the assumption that when `EnablePulls` is `true`, `CanEnablePulls` must be `true` as well, then this `if` check is redundant. Actually... we have `AllowsPulls` now... why not use that?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ScheduleServlet` class.", + "reference": "I am not sure why the API requires both project name and project ID as inputs. Wouldn't it introduce more opportunities for clients to make mistakes?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "I believe this was happening for several different flash messages - should we add `now` to all flash messages? (there might be a downside to doing that, but I am not sure what it would be)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ExceptionListener` class.", + "reference": "There is no docblock on the parent method. Also, not related, but I forgot to typehint the `$templating` constructor argument above." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.", + "reference": "Silly me. This shouldn't be done in the tests, but instead in the actual definition of ValidPHPVersions on arm64. Same with Mysql and MariaDB." + }, + { + "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Shouldn't this work as well for Disjoint?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we need to updateOrderStatus", + "reference": "You've not updated the `o.Status.Reason = fmt.Sprintf(\"Failed to retrieve Order resource: %v\", err)` line below here when you changed this, so here we are checking `errUpdate` but will print the contents of `err` instead." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "Doesn't this need to include `Errno::ECONNRESET` to fix the issue?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.", + "reference": "Please consider keeping the config key in one line as it will help in case someone is looking at how this config is used. public static final String PROJECT_CACHE_THROTTLE_PERCENTAGE = \"azkaban.project_cache_throttle_percentage\";" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ListSelectorEntries` interface.", + "reference": "This is a hard one, naming-wise... `ListPowerSelectorEntries` is logical given `ListSelectorEntries`. Another option could be `ListMatchingEntries` or even `FindMatchingEntries`. :shrug:" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.", + "reference": "This should be called `Uint` or `Uint32` or simply using our `Uint64` type instead. All of our numbers have varint encoding. It's not inherently a varint." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.", + "reference": "No need for this when you don't need to customize anything about the argument." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's a good idea.", + "reference": "We're now going to have 3 `#sections_accordion` will need to see how JS behaves. We should probably switch to a class selector instead" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the migration.", + "reference": "did you mean to leave this in here?" + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Mention that it only applies to Windows. This is kind of implied, but better to be explicit." + }, + { + "prediction": "I think this should be \"zero\" or \"negtive\"", + "reference": "again: it is a bad practice to have some global parameters with such common names for unit test purpose." + }, + { + "prediction": "should not be removed.", + "reference": "Should we use `\\DateTimeInterface` or `DateTimeInterface` and declaration of `DateTimeInterface` in `use`?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think we should add the task stack prefix to the task stack prefix.", + "reference": "What do you think of moving this stack related constant to the `stack` pkg?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.", + "reference": "Hm, I guess that you're doing this here since `WellFormed` is on a `transactions.Transaction` and not a `transactions.SignedTxn`, but quickly grepping through our code, it looks like we always a `SignedTxn` around when calling `WellFormed` (except maybe some tests?)... this doesn't have to happen here, but maybe we should update that in a separate PR since this really feels like a `WellFormed` check." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.", + "reference": "This story also needs the default padding." + }, + { + "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we can do that.", + "reference": "Hmm why did we remove the randomness about which (confusingly) different exception to throw here? This randomness was (is?) useful to help test that Lucene indeed catches `FNFE` and `NSFE` interchangeably." + }, + { + "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC", + "reference": "Hm, so before in that case `current_collection_id` looks like it was actually an uninitialized pointer. It seems weird to me that the tests pass both ways. I haven't looked closely at the tests - is there something wrong there that causes this to spuriously pass before?" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.", + "reference": "s it the best way to tag \"foo\" of \"`define foo...\" with constant kind? Introducing \"d/definition\" kind and tagging the \"foo\" with the definition kind is an alternative way. Using the unified kind \"constant\" in many areas reduces the information that client tools get from a tags file. In my experience, it is better to tag different things with different kinds. If ctags hides the differences, and just reports various language objects as \"constant,\" in some cases, a client tool must parse the raw.sv source file for distinguishing whether a given tag is \"`define\"'ed or not. IMHO, ctags should not be too smart. Instead, ctags should be stupid; it should report what it sees in source input files as-is to client tools that will do something smart." + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.", + "reference": "is this a breaking change? If I'm not mistaken, this is translating a user-provided `wtimeout` in the connection string into `wTimeoutMS`" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to just print('{}'.format(json.dumps(event)))", + "reference": "Can we rename this file to `lambda_echo.py`, to be more descriptive and in line with the other files in this directory? (all files in this folder are lambda functions, after all)" + }, + { + "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.", + "reference": "why not do it like this? 

     const ( Kill Action = iota Errno Trap Allow Trace ) 
    "
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this lock safe?",
+      "reference": "lock(this) is a bad practise, since you lock the entire instance. cosider: var appenderCache = xxxx. lock(appenderCache) { Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromHours(5)); } while inside AppenderCache instance lock(this) { is blocked 5 hours. } Its always better to make a class private lock objects."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should we use the constant above?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))())())(())((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I think something like `size_res` would be more descriptive."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Oh lol so this was...really more of a bug?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Well, it is providing a platform neutral way of calling Task or TaskEx. We could just call it PlatformTask."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think free() is necessary here.",
+      "reference": "Typo: this should free `xwayland` instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Is it ok to use \"math/rand\" instead of \"crypto/rand\" here? Do we need to protect this ID somehow?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Why did we have `logxi` in the first place? Maybe it makes sense to remove it from `glide.lock? It will safe us in the future from using logger which is not working."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason to use `getUNF()` and `UNF` in the same block?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Again this seems odd that megacheck cares"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I assume this will resolve to nil if this isn't in the config?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "I looks like we can make `allowOptionalMappings` non-optional since we have another overload without it. (I thought this generated a compiler warning, but maybe it's just R#)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));",
+      "reference": "` per scale.` -> ` per scale.` need to clean the unnecessary blank space"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "there's no import for Export"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "i don't think we want/need to make the node API available over UDS"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `return $this->articleFacade->findById($articleId);`",
+      "reference": "How about to skip if and returning null and return a result of `ArticleFacade::findById` directly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I think this change is currently unnecessary. I like the idea of `map()`, `filter()`, etc. returning vanilla JavaScript arrays rather than mongoose arrays, but I think that's a bit too heavy of a change for a patch release. I think that all we need for this release is the `if (!parent || parent.$__.populated == null) return;` change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "how about \"unknown\" instead of \"fafafaf\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "nit: do we gain anything from naming the output error `err` in this definition?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This can happen with any dialog. Maybe the best place to add this change would be the dialog component instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should this be `TearDown` since it now calls this method? Something I would like to see is, on test failure don't teardown completely instead leave the FAST repo in place with the stderr and stdout files and direct the user to that location. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "There's not particular reason to use a short name. Can we use a more descriptive name for the metric? Perhaps \"negativeLogLikelihood\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "not handling in case of `repr` makes the behavior probably a little too unpredictable. Is there a reason not to, apart missing stuff in the `repr`? Does it lead to some problem?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Remove the finally?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Build on AArch64 fails because WCHAR is not defined."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Do we use this const?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this may need to be `SetCertificateRequestAnnotations` as it returns a `CertificateRequestModifier`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]",
+      "reference": "it would likely be better to do this in the Identifier.by_scheme_name method itself."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the order by.",
+      "reference": "@janette looking at this test code, I'm pretty sure that it's going to give a false positive. Where is it actually checking the contents of the first four datasets against expected values? All the assertion at the end of the test seems to check is that at least four datasets exist."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `app.js` file.",
+      "reference": "Would this break things if Ghost is run in a subdirectory or no?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "maybe switch the order in order to make this a positive assertion instead of a negative one? i.e. `if key =~ /id/` first."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to move this to `selenium.common.exceptions.ElementNotVisibleException` and use `selenium.common.exceptions.ElementNotVisibleException` instead of `selenium.common.exceptions.ElementNotVisibleException`.",
+      "reference": "Is this an oversight for some code in the body?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Reason for adding this? I couldn't find where you are retrieving it back."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can we expect adequate information emitted to the log in case either requiring preloads.rb or doing the requires in preloads.rb fails? If the answer is yes, I think we can merge this PR right away."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "How about a `app/views/layouts/pages.html.erb` layout that contains the HTML head, body, wrappers and yield's the `new-topics` template into it? I think we might be able to delete the `app/controllers/pages_controller.rb` file at that point."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This is a coarse solution. This check is helpful, but you should also add a check in `$__version()` to avoid calling `isSelected()` if `key === false`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Passing only needed data to make it can be reused by `planpreview` package where there is no deployment data."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Options` struct. I don't think we should add this to the `Options` struct. I think we should add this to the `Options` struct.",
+      "reference": "Could we rename those to `CustomClientAuthentication` (same for Router) to remove ambiguity between Authentication and Authorization (permissions)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Is the name \"IMvxFormsViewPresenter\" too close to \"IMvxFormsPagePresenter\"? Perhaps something like \"IMvxFormsNativeViewPresenter\" or \"IMvxFormsPlatformViewPresenter\" or inline with Forms naming \"IMvxFormsOnPlatformViewPresenter\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "`typeof child!= 'boolean'` maybe?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not enough information for us to try to rebuild an error",
+      "reference": "Why && changed to ||?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: not a big deal right now but spec assigns ID 0 to InitAddress"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "/javascript/firefox-driver is the Selenium implementation of a WebDriver for Firefox. Since it generally isn't W3C compatible, it shouldn't change. We can just drop this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "There are various places where `setZoomFactor` is used but `fuzzyval` isn't set: - `__init__` and `on_config_changed` (should be okay as `init_neighborlist` gets called which essentially does the same) - `zoom` (calls `zoom_perc` with `fuzzyval=False`), which is used by `:zoom-in` and `:zoom-out`. Are you sure this won't break those calls? (Yes, I know there should be tests for this - I'm working on that.) Other existing places probably should get simplified."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "Is there a benefit to keeping this in RefinementSettings? Or could we move it into its own class in TestUtil?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this work?",
+      "reference": "I would have expected the Ready method to need to change to be a `<-chan Result` instead of a `<-chan map[string]Result`. The difference being that now the Ready channel can produce more than one set of results. In fact the name Ready is inaccurate now since its not about the query being ready but just a mechanism to deliver results. If this should be a follow up PR that is fine, lets create an issue for it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "why? what if we want to access those methods outside of azkaban-common?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "Rename file too"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Need to populate the `RequestID` field for these errors. This can be obtained from r.RequestID i think, but need to make sure. The `r.RequestID` should of been populated from the `UnmarshalMeta` handler list."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "Why is the `final` being removed here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this file.",
+      "reference": "Maybe let's take this opportunity to change easylogging to a git submodule?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Should we just be generous and elide all extra whitespace? `strings.TrimSpace`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "This is an inaccurate API that has outlived it's purpose. We can't make the determination of phone (vs) tablet, with a 7\" screen in the mix. Also, with the advent of fragments, this API means very little now. It's not being used anywhere, since we switched to `ActionBar`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This change means that users can't easily see which version of the selenium server they're using. This is `info` level information."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "You should just use `with patch(...):`, so it unpatches it automatically. Also, much simpler."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "This didn't use to work for me. Are you sure that returns the correct instance from startup?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Looks good. Eventually we could remove some of these constructors, but for now adding these two seems the way to go"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "@jalavik should be have somewhere enum/list/registry of possible tags?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "why is this pylint disable needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to 'false'",
+      "reference": "The new sync feature is only being supported from within Terraform. Installations using the deprecated method will have this feature disabled."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This type of return (f'xxx') is not recommended, it is recommended to return 'xxx'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I would make this level 1 or 2."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Is that path in a variable anyway? Not a big fan of hard coding it here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the error to the error message.",
+      "reference": "nit: Move `IdentityTemplateLabel` to be under `IdentityTemplate` to match the struct in config_crd.go"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AnalyticsHelper` class.",
+      "reference": "Not necessarily related to this PR, but don't you think having a centralized place for all interactions with analytics might make this into a very big class? Is that something that you don't worry about until it happens?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "it seems that my terminal is dead when I press ctrl+c during running daisy cli today, is this PR fixing that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "If we are going to add config to specify the maximum message pool size, we should probably also add a parameter for the maximum nonce gap and pass it into the `IngestionValidator`. This could be done in this PR or added as an issue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "please inline imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should IptablesPostWriteCheckIntervalSecs be set back to its previous smaller value, if use of the iptables lock is disabled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `error` or a `error` or a `error` message.",
+      "reference": "Please use packageInfo here instead. As it is used in `app.js`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::",
+      "reference": "this seems unrelated to the rest of the PR, although related to the original report"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((set)))))))))))))))(((((((((set(set(set)))))))))((set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set(set",
+      "reference": "Would a check for added columns with non-null default be sufficient for aligned format?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Is this PR implementing compute service account for OVF import as well? I thought it's only image/one-step import? Btw, OVF importer uses \"-\" instead of \"_\" in flags (should be `compute-service-account`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the routes.php file.",
+      "reference": "Why change to element?? in whole application use plural convention??"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Tiniest nit but this can be `tabindex={-1}`, `width={11}`, `height={11}`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Unrelated to this PR, we should remove this exception. We now require `numpy`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Is the loop over vars and adding them to the subworkflow below in this file needed, since it's already done by NewSubWorkflowFromFile?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Having to write this util makes me think that maybe we should have kept the csv_input stuff. I don't know."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Passing in and saving a reference to the `BlockCache` at init time is going to break if something calls `config.ResetCaches()`, because it replaces the `BlockCache` instance completely. This happens on user logout or by a manual write to `.kbfs_reset_caches`. So you probably want to give it the whole `config`, or maybe just the `config.BlockCache` function pointer."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I am not sure this could happen. st should be nil if the error happens. If it does happen, we could also do st.Reset(), since it is an erroureous state so it closes both sides of the stream."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I'm guessing this was just added for debugging? Should probably remove it so we aren't modifying 3rd party libs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to print the result.",
+      "reference": "This seems reversed... if `success?` is true, wouldn't we use `success`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This seemed like the easiest way to allow log level checks, it will require an update to the vendors tool, to ignore that file on update."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "Should we disallow entry authors to unsubscribe to their entries?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "2016 should be 2017."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "boolean exists = (existSchema!= null) && (existSchema.getSummary()!= null);"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It does not look idiomatic."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We need to import the builtins for the tests to work. We need to import the builtins for the tests to work. We need to import the builtins for the tests to work.",
+      "reference": "Generally, we do not use newlines between project imports, we only separate them from the stdlib imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it would be better to have a `if (player.isLocalPlayer && playbackManager.isFullscreen(player)) { }`",
+      "reference": "can this long line be wrapped?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the `comparison-with-callable`.",
+      "reference": "I'd use the same message that I suggested in the release changelog."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Keep semi-colons at end of function defs please"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Operation` class.",
+      "reference": "A little skeptical of `explain` being here. Why is this now a property of all commands?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.",
+      "reference": "License copied two times!!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the matcher here. I don't think we should change the matcher here.",
+      "reference": "... their **superclass**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure if this is the right thing to be doing here. It seems like there should be a more systemic fix instead of this patch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Not sure why these are up here can we move these down to be part of the `@return` tag instead? This is what we usually do (e.g. `getCurrentEntityURL`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Layout/EmptyLinesAroundBlockBody: Extra empty line detected at block body beginning."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We keep who wrote the code anonymous."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Mention something in logs, that fake registration was used e.g. `Fake identity registered`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think it would make sense to also set `internalWebPropertyID` to `''` here. Otherwise, it might keep its previous value (let's say a property was selected before, but then the user chooses \"Create new property\"), but since it always should depend on `propertyID`, that would be incorrect."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "It might be reasonable to add a check that sanitization still fails here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to get the job id from the job id?",
+      "reference": "Why not use attemptNo instead of another call to getAttempt? Even better, consider using a private method to calculate this string. This logic is in two places."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.",
+      "reference": "Yuck. Rails bug."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list of layers.",
+      "reference": "It's useally a common practice to not use `l` as a variable (we have disabled this test in scapy because our code has tons, but it would have PEP8 failed otherwise), but it would be better not to create any. In general, single letter variables are not liked that much. Especially with windows where the fonts make 1=l How about `lay`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context. I don't think we should add the tag to the context.",
+      "reference": "DRY these 5 lines into a function call, no?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "should we be trying to close here? or just return directly @fabxc? same goes for `stopc`..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "just re-ordered for clarity"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you fix this also to print what is the IP address used to connect. Rename --> \"M_API server\" to maya apiservice"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This fails on Go 1.11 because `indexByte` is already defined in strings_go111.go. I would suggest simply renaming one of the two, for example you could rename the other one to `strings_indexByte` (that will be one of the things we'll drop when we drop Go 1.11 support so it's better to make that one look ugly instead of the function that we will likely keep for a longer time)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "Now `dbType=' MockDbType.int32 '` is correctly interpreted and the value is rendered as an integer instead of a string; hence no more double quotes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "typo in `$contend`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "Nit: empty line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a panic.",
+      "reference": "I figured this was more fool-proof than trying to plumb the error up from everywhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We know debug and trace as globals exist and are defaulted to 0. In this instance we need to know that c is non- nil, srv is non-nil and logging is non-nil before we can trust this statement not to panic."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Good removal here for two reasons: we're redeclaring `app.ConfigPath` immediately below without having used the initial value, and `app.GetConfigPath()` will build the value using the same process as in this line anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to use it.",
+      "reference": "Should BuildBase be removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this was a bad Goland auto-import that I missed in the previous PR. Thanks to @rkowalick and @acruikshank for catching it"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not remove the query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query query",
+      "reference": "Good catch here. Reading the code, it actually seems kind of dumb that `replaceAtom` needs to copy the atom it's passed. Ah well, we're more or less stuck with that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `wlr_signal_emit_safe(&output->events.present, &event)`",
+      "reference": "What's the reason for adding the output pointer here? I'd expect it to be derivable from the actual handler that's called."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I don't see tests for this (or the similar method on `Team`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "should use Number instead of Long"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We had the checks for those two errors for a reason, why do we not need them anymore?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why didn't you just switch to `range` here too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I don't even think `nil` should be allowed, since it uses global state to get the client."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "You somehow got a change from `master` into your branch again, in e6d2167085688264e5ee6a81cfd2a7a8f10ded13. While it's not something terribly bad (as it will be fine after merging), it's kind of confusing, and I have no idea how it happens :laughing: Are you trying to update changes from `master` while working on your branch somehow? How do you do that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Minor, can we drop the leading `!` and just swap the if and the else blocks?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good fix.",
+      "reference": "`bbox_feats.shape[0] > 0` requires the number of proposal is not 0."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "Just FYI, I had to remove this unused import because Travis/`npm run lint` were complaining."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to include `force.h` here.",
+      "reference": "format.h is not a system header but bundled with LAMMPS. This should be `#include \"fmt/format.h\"`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "could we always call visitDocValuesWithCardinality? It seems to include the version check already?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "I think if they _don't_ specify a port, we should assume grid default (which is 4444)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/((((((((()))))))))/(((((((()))))))/(((((((())))))/(((((((()))))/((((((((())))))/(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This looks to be a breaking change. I know it will affect some of my code that uses the Tautomer enumerator."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps remove this line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not removeHydrides if we don't want to removeHydrides.",
+      "reference": "Ah, missed this one. Sorry: you don't need to test the atomic number here. that's taken care of above on line 683."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "roundInfo() is called by couple of places in consensus for safety, better test/verify the delay of return err due to this Sleep() would not affect the normal functionality, like consensus can still be reached, full-node can correctly sync"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This 32 could go away too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "These props should be less specifically named since the component is generic, for example `anchorLink`, `anchorLinkLabel`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "In the future, it'd be great if we can separate commits or PRs that aren't in the same scope"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "can you define the string format on a different line, so it can be named, and so that it does not have to be constructed twice?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method in the `install` method.",
+      "reference": "Can we write a unit test for this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `session_save('_autosave', quiet=True, force=True)`",
+      "reference": "Same as above, use `.delete('_autosave')`, not the command handler."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "It isn't necessary to check whether there are projected ID columns. The code is shorter if the values are available by default, even if they aren't used. This fixes the problem where there are constants to add (like `_file`) but no identity partition values are projected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `RemoteConnection` class.",
+      "reference": "Update after command rename"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "@KroArtem This is the Checkstyle violation. This import should be grouped with other `net.sourceforge.pmd` imports below, in alphabetical order"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `ShowPicturesControll` class.",
+      "reference": "This change seems unrelated to copying email addresses to the clipboard. Please limit the scope of pull requests as much as possible."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd and close the keymap_fd.",
+      "reference": "I'm assuming that there isn't a way for us to skip sending an fd here (-1?), and that we're allocating this fd just to send a legal but useless value across?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "might be good for the units (bytes?) to be in the variable name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the routes.rb file.",
+      "reference": "Metrics/BlockLength: Block has too many lines. [166/25]"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new field to the file.",
+      "reference": "I'd end the sentence after `special indicator (line 3)`. And then start a new sentence: `The special field can indicate that the field specifies a reset, is a sequence ID, or is a timestamp for the record.`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((()))))))))(((()))))((((())))))((((())))))((((()))))(((((())))))((((()))))(((((())))))((((())))))((((())))))(((((()))))))((((((((((())))))))((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "These empty lines can be kept."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.",
+      "reference": "For some reason these tests started failing due to an extra `NEWLINE` returned from `h.query()`. Have not tried to check whether this may be a problem for real templates or not, just fixed the failing tests. Anyone with an opinion here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?",
+      "reference": "It is better to have a method than a var."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "concurrent poller won't be larger than concurrent execution. Jump from 2 -> 16 seems aggressive. I suggest to use 8. Ideally, this should be dynamic config. :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "List is redundant."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Please use a string resource here rather than the hardcoded string \"user\". This allows the app to be multilingual."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "@aswathkk Why did we remove this import? I guess we are using it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Stop` method.",
+      "reference": "Why? I thought this is for graceful shutdown."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can `result.stdout` or `result.stderr` be nil?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@mprobst Looks like the `isStdLib` function has been removed in the latest Python plugin. Any thoughts on how to handle this? The new version doesn't seem to have any relevant alternatives."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `int` instead of a `int`.",
+      "reference": "How can there be a configured max ipset size? Surely we need to write ipsets with however many members are implied by the Calico datastore?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "This code is passing a non localized string when it should be passing in a localized string or it should use the name of the item being deleted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why not be consistent with `isNull` and `notNull` and return null?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "Did we forget to remove this field?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `BaseRefreshableMap` class.",
+      "reference": "What if there is no element?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think you need to be careful to honour isTest and stamp here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "why zero value for `arrayType` for the default value of the optional args?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "@robinbonnes ~~Would you mind putting the array key and value on a new line - it makes it more readable as an array.~~ Never mind, see discussion below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I've never seen us do this anywhere else - why here? Why not `address, meshAddress string`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "I think it's necessary only for the earlier \"dynamic\" approach. I suppose it's not necessary in the eager one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "DoctrineTypeToFormTypeMap is not used anymore?",
+      "reference": "Same here than [there](#r26168925)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Again we should think about moving this pattern to a static final field"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "haven't been implemented the `__constructor` for `NormalizerConfigPass`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Docstring is missing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I don't see the reason of this return as it will stop loading in half because an error, thats bad imo. Or you load it all and report errors or you load nothing and terminate, the first is as it always was so I wouldn't change that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should addPeers to the topology backlog. I don't think we should addPeers to the topology backlog.",
+      "reference": "change from AddPeer to AddPeers added a space in some occurrences"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Do you remove \"s\" from \"iptables\" to IPTable\" on purpose? I feel it should be \"IPTablesRules\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "nit: not your problem - but I wonder if this should have been a \"ConstantResponseRpc\" - which takes a name and a value.... maybe a more reusable concept."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "These changes have been resolved upstream. We can revert changes to this file when synced."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "The description predates this diff but I think we can come up with something more grounded."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the API spec.",
+      "reference": "Let the Kind, APIVersion & Metadata follow the rules followed by Volume. What is the reason for a change for snapshot struct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "seems that we did not strong depend servo no need to keep it? change to another one?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Looks like this used to be UB before with an empty blocks and then calling `.second` on the `.front()`. Did it ever crash though?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Sorry about the code churn here, reworking this use normal loops and async await made debugging far more straight forward. For example, if configuring the fail point fails you find out when stepping over that line vs having to look for the ultimate catch clause that handled it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this is wrong and should be reverted"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think you'll need to add an import for runtime, before you can merge this PR. (Presumably it was already there for something else when you were working on this, but has since disappeared.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((())))))((((()))))(((((((((())))))))",
+      "reference": "Unrelated typo fix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I don't think we need an empty value here; any middleware that wants a default value for empty placeholders will pass in what that value should be."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why was this changed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Compared to using traditional enums, I suggest to use `Status` or `StatusOr`, since they are more expressive and informative. Besides, isolating the definitions of error code of individual modules from the ones of the RPC interface is a good practice, isn't it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Use the return of the conditional for variable assignment and comparison."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed. I think it would be better to import it from selenium.webdriver.common.utils.keys_to_typing import AnyKey from selenium.webdriver.common.utils import AnyKey",
+      "reference": "just realised... This breaks things since there is not selenium types module, is there a PR for this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "move to line 23 below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "this is not a bug, but it's not a bug, it's a bug, and it's not a bug, it's a bug, and it's not a bug, it's a bug, and it's a bug, and it's not a bug.",
+      "reference": "the first problem i found in the passcode change flow is that these two lines were happening in 'lock()' but not in'showLockActivity' which is what the passcode change flow calls. I've just moved them to happen in that method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an error if we don't want to raise an error.",
+      "reference": "Doing this adds the actual resources themselves to the dictionary. I think for now, there's no way to know what the resource config provided may be, as we don't permit resource config on `build_solid_context`, so this part can be omitted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I think it would be better to move this to the `ResubscriptionsController` so that we don't have to worry about the `ResubscriptionsController` class.",
+      "reference": "1 trailing blank lines detected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I would personally prefer a filename without an abbreviation, a newcomer to the project wouldn't be able to translate \"pv\" to \"partition-value\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This check looks odd to me. I can't quite grok it. Why is it needed now? What's changed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This change is needed because otherwise the path was being changed from `path/store/jetstream` to `path/store/` and files stored differently after re-enabling."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the client.",
+      "reference": "is this necessary? doesn't `client.close()` imply all sessions will be ended?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Extra line, it's not needed here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to go about this, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it. I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but I'm not sure if it's the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Is this OK to add in the spec helper? I need to call `Bolt::PAL.load_puppet` so that I can use the new `Bolt::PAL::Issues` module when verifying that plans forbid functions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `CharSeq` class.",
+      "reference": "or is it `i < length - back.length()`? `\"12345\".padTo(10, 'a')` should be `12345aaaaa`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be done in the `train_detector` class.",
+      "reference": "custom_imports -> custom_hooks"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't get why are we baking new hash structures to represent phases, sections, questions. We are not only loosing the references defined in models but also we have to figure out keys and values for this newly structures."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "It's somewhat confusing that the `preload` parameter shadows the instance variable; maybe rename the instance variable to `globalPreload` or `preloadDefault` or so to prevent future confusion?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Are we setting these values anywhere?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This has to be in front of all other includes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "These changes make sense to me. @ricrogz : you wrote (I think ) the original version of this as part of #2553 Do you see any reason to not make the change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`window.self === window`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "maybe we should keep one test case for ErrFileNotExists and update only one file for ErrWorkspaceNotFound?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Please add `ConsigureAwait(false)` here and on `ShutdownAsync` below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Isn't this a false positive? Why are we reporting `unused-variable` on a `del` operation with a `undefined-variable`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log the session upload and download amounts. I think we should log the session upload and download amounts.",
+      "reference": "Is it correct that `SessionDto` should be here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "sorry I missed this earlier. We no longer use ovs-ofctl for flow programming AFAIK, why not add this support to ofnet / libOpenflow?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `loadAssets()` method.",
+      "reference": "Make this consistent with the other definition please `'false'` vs `false`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this is a good way to do it. :+1:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why this is needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into a separate function.",
+      "reference": "Can we define this directly in the function `NewConnTrackOvsAppCtl` instead of passing this as an argument?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "False positives are annoying..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is the infrastructure layer an appropriate one? I don't think so tbh, more like an application, or even a domain one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Why is this required to turn the static readonlies into jitted const? Is this a bug in the jitter?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "feel free to make this a \"typed\" named tuple (overriding __new__) if you are feeling frisky"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Would use parenthesis to explicitly state the associations of operands ```js const MAX_SAFE_INTEGER = Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER || ((2 ** 53) - 1)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "The bug was caused by this order change in the last refactoring."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This is already imported as docker. You're safe to simply use `docker.utils.kwargs_from_env()` below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new action.",
+      "reference": "No need to add this fun. Using RunnableActionsBuilder#AddActions instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "I don't think it's possible to do this for hooks"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "wait(1ms) when sec=0. wait(0ms) waits forever so that's why this is better."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Do we need `domain` and `so_reuseport` now that we open new sockets immediately after calling `add_listener`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "The formatting seems different from the rest of the code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What about calling this package \"parameters\"? utils\\parameters are utils related to parameters."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "what is the actual difference here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Parsing URLs is hard. Any fixes should avoid manually parsing the URL."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "This is a private api, it doesn't need to return anything so `@group_level -= 1 if @group_level > 0` is preferred."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/(((()))((((((((()))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": ".GetValueOr(0)... but really, shouldn't m_value_strife also be optional?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the `metaFields` field to the `meta` field.",
+      "reference": "Working around a possible limitation in the JSDoc plugin's typescript syntax checking. This means the same thing"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````",
+      "reference": "Should be readonly"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I'm not going to stop accepting the PR, but I really hate these artifacts getting dropped in the Python code just to stop things like coverage checkers and linters from complaining."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this file should be renamed to `KytheAuthors`.",
+      "reference": "FYI modifying an existing file generally doesn't invalidate the copyright date. The date here is when the copy right _begins_, so moving it later is arguably misleading-it still applies. Not a big deal, just something I've seen a few times in passing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this filter.",
+      "reference": "Because the default value of allowedOrigins is * (all origins), so it isn't necessary to set again at all."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should check that warehouse location is not set. If warehouse location is not set, we should check that warehouse location is not set.",
+      "reference": "Style: indentation should be 4 spaces (2 indents) from the start of `Preconditions`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `formFieldOptions` array. I don't think that's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I don't know why I suggested a html attribute at first (my bad), or maybe you think it makes sense. Otherwise, what about a simple class?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.",
+      "reference": "Probably want something more generic here like 'DMPRoadmap' so that other installations aren't using UoE by default."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception.",
+      "reference": "Must this not change to `MustBeRethrownImmediately`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Can it be pointer?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "Not related to this issue but this condition seems weak."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the trait.",
+      "reference": "I think this might be a little more readable in two lines as: 
     $preferredMarcField = $this->mainConfig->Record->preferredMarcField?? 'fullrecord'; $marc = trim($this->fields[$preferredMarcField]?? $this->fields['fullrecord']); 
    "
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "does this still allow this file to be used with Python installations that don't have numpy?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "what about 0? Version probably can' start with 0, but v10 is theoretically possible."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Usually we consider APIs that have filesystem interactions to be part of IFileHelper, this would allow us to inject a testable implementation easily. `Path.IsRootedPath` doesn't access the file system. It is string comparison I believe."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the status to \"Init\"",
+      "reference": "Do we need to use quote? Why not `status: Init`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.",
+      "reference": "Nice catch! I don't think I would have caught that, did you search the whole code base for pre-existing functions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should test cluster deployment without region label.",
+      "reference": "Remove this line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "This is no longer called in any of our unit tests, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule rule",
+      "reference": "I think typically K8s APIs will use `int32` and not `uint32`. I think we should keep it consistent with the rule `Priority` above. I believe that the rationale for using `int32` in general is: * some programming languages don't have native support for unsigned integers * it's easier to catch sign errors with signed integers, depending on the programming language (it it's negative, it's clearly an error but if it's a very large number, it could be normal or it could be a negative number overflow)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this column to the migration.",
+      "reference": "If you end up changing grant to an association, this may need to change to a reference to enforce the foreign_key `add_reference :plans, :grant`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This won't work because `notification` comes from an API response here. I think this would be the same as the change to `Alert` where it would get `SmallSunSVG`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is not checked below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Will this ever return a \"Stack does not exist\" error? Should we handle it silently here rather than making higher level packages do error checking?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "minor: at this scale, one import per line reads better"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the default value here.",
+      "reference": "Should remove the default templates as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Why not `let`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be in the `ZipkinServer` class, not in the `ZipkinServer` class.",
+      "reference": "ns -> DNS My first reading was this is referring to System.nanoTime and thought hrm?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a vestigial parameter that is not used and will be removed in the future check.opt_str_param(scheduler, \"scheduler\")",
+      "reference": "is there a reason not to remove the param now? I think the serdes will still work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`places=2` seems to be very poor comparison. Do you have any thoughts why is it fail with more strict checks?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "should we make level debug? Also just FYI, with debug level, we can add more detailed logging for better debuggability without concerning overwhelming logging message"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I needed to add this import for Sphinx to inspect C++ runtime objects properly. This should be the only code change in this PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Changes in this file aren't related to the PR, are they? You took the opportunity to change the group deletion to using the subscriber too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'd probably move this into `MetricsConfig` as a private method. Seems like we only use it there."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Not clear here what you mean with this list"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.",
+      "reference": "Curious, is there a way we can get around this without suppressing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I don't think we this field in session, it's a serial number for proposal but not unique index itself"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Benchmark` class.",
+      "reference": "Can't have two benchmarks with `Baseline = true`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `test-client-config.js` file.",
+      "reference": "Same here: Empty line before and no `Internal dependencies` docblock (mandatory anyway once #217 lands)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\"),\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "sorry, the default value for this field is no longer allowed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Why does this work? I'd've expected that an admin could create a file anywhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "falling back to `x64` seems like a really bad idea given that the VS templates default to x86 these days."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Bit surprised by this. I would have thought either you want to set it for both mpl and bokeh...or alternatively it was only ever meant for bokeh and was always wrong?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Check modname instead, but only if it's a ImportFrom."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "How about `write.metadata.previous-versions-max`? No need to refer to these as a log."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We generally do this via tags in the Rakefile, not separate environment variables."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `RemoteConnection` class.",
+      "reference": "Update after command rename"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "`if X not in Y:`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Do we know why the pool is exhausted? In the past, we had a few leaks in the Spark catalog code which led to this. It can be also a valid use case too if we simply need a larger pool."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Logging in Bolt still seems to be a little messy. I think this is more correct than what I had before, but made sure I wouldn't overwrite an existing level. And if console logging gets more options, both debug and verbose need to be fixed here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This could be simplified (if including  is fine): `auto address_string = boost::algorithm::erase_first_copy (address.to_string (), \"::ffff:\");`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This is wildly unhelpful to users --- they need to know when a proxy has been registered."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `topics` model.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need `do_not_validate_attachment_file_type` is we're doing it in the previous line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the login page in the `LoginActivity` class. I don't think that's a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Loading login page right away only for the regular use case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "IIRC this flag disables re-rendering entirely (`s/recursively //`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Did you test this redirect? @thornbill mentioned it might need `web` at the front, but if this works fine I'd rather leave it this way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.",
+      "reference": "FYI, this returned `StringValues` which is a value type (aka can never be null)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Oh no, that's a bug."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Let's leave a note in CHANGES to replace this with an error metadata struct or interface, unless it would be less effort overall to take a run at it in this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The changelog entry does a better job of explaining how this is used than this description. In particular, this says that you need to set `mapTo` if the underlying name is different, but not that `mapTo` *is* the underlying name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "These imports will probably need to be refactored so they aren't here. That applies for all of the database drivers. The reason for this is because we sometimes want a driver to be available and sometimes we don't. When we include this library in our cloud offering, the sqlite3 connector needs to be gone because it's a security vulnerability and there's no use case for it in a cloud environment. But for flux itself, I can see how sqlite3 would be really useful and so I like this change. But this import needs to only exist within the tests and within the `cmd/flux` package. It cannot be here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `$this->relationModel->getKeyName()`",
+      "reference": "We can use `getQualifiedKeyName` here instead. I will update."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could you clarifty why some of those are removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in ListDeploymentConfigTemplates"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "nice to see the usage of block for a more readable link name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can these use `static_cast` instead? Other than that, it's fine."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This output is only present when `DEBUG=True`. Does it really bother so much?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I think it should pass wallet transaction as well, otherwise there will be 2 wallet read transactions in 1 threads (next in scan_receivable)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" (\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "RDKit::Utils is now in the namespace for localeswitcer... We could change it to something else."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to flatten the tuple, but I don't think we need to flatten the tuple.",
+      "reference": "@itholic, can we fix it in `_normalize_keyword_aggregation`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the subscription class.",
+      "reference": "It seems like we have the main plan in the database but the downgrade plan in the code. Probably okay for now, but as our thinking of how downgrades/plans develops we may want to consolidate."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "we shouldn't add a bunch of static initializers 'everywhere' in the code. Probably just one would be good, during the construction of the 'RemoteWebDriver' class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the option name here. I think we should add the option name here.",
+      "reference": "do we need both flags? maybe infer that `clef-signer-enabled` whenever `clef-signer-endpoint` is defined?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Do we need this? I didn't see css files (only scss)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This feels like a weird `if not... or not` to me. Can you talk out the intent here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `annualized_payment` method in the `annualized_payment` class.",
+      "reference": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this package.",
+      "reference": "`@package *` can be removed as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `platforms.rb` file.",
+      "reference": "@ScottGarman is there a reason that `redhat_fips` needs to be a beaker platform? Why can't it be another platform that beaker just understands as `redhat`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Where is the other place?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Are you subclassing from `UserList` instead of `list` to satisfy some constraint of Jython? My main concern here is that this is a subtle breaking change to the API because `UserList` is not a subclass of `list`. This has the unfortunate side effect of breaking any user that is using `isinstance` checks to see if a `ResultSet` is a `list`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We can DRY the above three functions"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Only no good is good code. Nice that you were able to remove all this duplicate stuff!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Looking at the code, it seems very odd that this method even exists in the SurfaceNamer, since it is only implemented and used in the PhpSurfaceNamer, and in fact the RetrySettings class name is hardcoded elsewhere. WDYT of just removing this method from SurfaceNamer and PhpSurfaceNamer?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "these interfaces are defined twice. we should use only one and have it in `storage` package maybe"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a global variable.",
+      "reference": "This is the wrong context for usage of `global` keyword. It need only be used inside functions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "this change should be described in the changelog. I'll update it when merging if nothing else arises."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Just to stay consistent with naming let's call it CreateGRPCDispatcherForOutbound. Also rename 'CreateDispatcherForOutbound' to 'CreateTChannelDispatcherForOutbound'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This will always need to be displayed to users."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good solution.",
+      "reference": "This looks very much like `repr` now (we miss 127 though) - maybe just do `repr(x)` + strip outer parantheses?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't see this field is set in task_generator.go. worth to double check if we put the timestamp when creating replication tasks."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is notified()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()() this()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()() this()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()",
+      "reference": "nit: I prefer the space before and after this check to make it very easy to scan when reading through code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "should users also do a triple-flush?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "What is the implication of removing these from the test? I thought the idea was to have all types supported by `docstore` here, and do things in the drivers to make them support them (e.g., list of size 2 for complex). If you're removing them because firestore doesn't have native support, then we're going to end up only testing the intersection of all types supported by all drivers; we need a better way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Let's also adjust the somewhat weird type signature here as well. This probably should be `typing.Any` instead of `str` in the last line if we intend to support ints."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to remove the test data.",
+      "reference": "The body can just be `os.RemoveAll(dir)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this covered by regression tests? Also you might make a patch onto refactor branch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `SolrPing` class.",
+      "reference": "This is maybe more of an admin request? WDYT?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.",
+      "reference": "Here I thought of `toHashMap` and later add `toTreeMap`. But I start to see, what you may have in mind. Alternatively we could provide a `toMap` and `toSortedMap`, which is great, too. On the other hand is always good to be as specific as possible. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "maybe localProjectAppNames? Just a thought."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This isn't new, but getHeightWidth is now defined in block_svg.js, block_render_svg_horizontal.js, and block_render_svg_vertical.js. One of these should be unnecessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I can't see any reason why this would fix a failure in `a.True(confirmed, \"txgroup\")`. We might have an issue elsewhere, but increasing the wait time wouldn't help."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This section needs to be modified; crontab format differs between OS releases (Debian and CentOS, at least)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "if we think this is likely to be augmented with a additional 'run coordination' features or configuration in the future, we could make it an object of some kind instead (or an enum, if we think there may be other resume modes in the future besides just on/off). Just imagining 6 months in the future, it would be unfortunate if there were 7 new args here as the feature gets more complex"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "import from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample from.grid_sampler import grid_sample",
+      "reference": "`affine_grid` and `grid_sample` are currently unused. We may remove it from `ops/__init__.py` to speedup the loading of mmdet."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason why you need to support negative `AttackTimeout`? Why not just throw an error?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should import this from pyspark.sql.functions as F from pyspark.sql.functions as F from pyspark.sql.functions as F from pyspark.sql.functions as F from pyspark.sql.functions as F from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like, is_sequence_like_from_object from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like_from_object from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like_from_object_from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like_from_object_from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like_from_object_from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like_from_object_from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_like_from_object_from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_sequence_like_from_object_from pandas.core.dtypes.inference import is_sequence_sequence_like_from_from_object_from pandas.core.core.core.dtypes.inference import is_",
+      "reference": "nit: an unnecessary change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is trailer parsing something we have to do in this PR? It would be really helpful to separate stuff like this into smaller, self-contained PRs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to wait for the volume to be destroyed.",
+      "reference": "Any chance of a wait-forever situation here? Is there a reasonable timeout?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to rollback the blockchain first.",
+      "reference": "line is 165 characters"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should wait for one whole cycle of the namespace cache refresh interval to be sure our namespaces are loaded.",
+      "reference": "is this for cross DC case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove this line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should add this to `webmAudioCodecs.includes('opus')`",
+      "reference": "Maybe it would make sense to use `webmVideoCodecs` here and just append `vpx`. I'm not sure if av1 is currently supported when transcoding to webm though. It looks like it can be included in the mp4 transcoding profile now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Interestingly, this has nothing to do with replication, no clue what this means here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is that because we don't provide a UI for these?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work. We need to init flux for the tests to work.",
+      "reference": "Standard is either to use `HappyPath` (CamelCase) or `happy path` (lowercase sentence). I usually prefer the latter."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this work?",
+      "reference": "instead of using blkMemDao, we could generate a blockMemDao, and then use it as the second parameter."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "nit(2/10): `topology && topology.description!= null`;"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should import pyspark.sql from pyspark.sql",
+      "reference": "why the space? I may not know all the style conventions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `assert.isFalse(checks.dlitem.evaluate.apply(null, checkArgs)));",
+      "reference": "Should be \"should fail if the **dt element** has a parent 
     with a changed role\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think we need to do that.",
+      "reference": "Just to be clear: 1. This is required for compression, right? 2. This won't actually result in our dynos serving the assets, since they'll be served via the CDN, correct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this warning.",
+      "reference": "not sure about removing this ping @Soullivaneuh"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "If instance could not be found when the provider id is set, `findInstance()` returns `ErrInstanceNotFoundByID` error. So that during reconcileNormal(), we don't create a new instance. In `reconcileDelete()`, when ErrInstanceNotFoundByID is seen, deletion continues to clean up even if the instance is gone (may be manually deleted)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "I would recommend making this a Tuple<ReplicateValue, IColllection<object>> You only need to convert things to strings if you need to persist them in Settings or something. If they only need to live for the life of dialog, you can keep everything as objects. You can use \"null\" for the ReplicateValue for when they have not chosen a property."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think there is no point providing action key here, as it will be called specifically, rather than randomly"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "`XUnitIntegration` doesn't need to cache this anymore."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this file should be renamed to \"themes/*\"",
+      "reference": "Can we have something line `# noqa` there instead? I think it's fine like this though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this variable is used in both branches so I've decided to declare it above"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "`setFlags()` overwrites the previous flag, we should be using `addFlags()` to append flags."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Need `return` after this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I would say we should not use the `CacheableResponseTrait` within the `JsonResponseTrait`. Traits within traits tend to lead to a bad developer experience as it can be really hard to find the actual method you're seeing in the implementing class, and in this case it looks like we're using _both_ the cacheable and the JSON traits in the same controller, so it's redundant anyway. I'd recommend just removing that use statement from `JsonResponseTrait` and make sure `ChaceableResponseTrait` is included everywhere it's needed specifically."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message. I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This change is unhelpful: it precludes users from knowing which ports are being used for what purpose within the system."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Whoa, we weren't doing this before?? Derp."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'm surprised we didn't go with something like `flow := f.Flow.Copy()` to take care of all the fields at once, but as long as it works it's good enough for me"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We would like this code to run, even when `config.XDPEnabled` is false, so that Felix can clean up its own XDP state after a restart."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'd declare this field `qualifiedName` private to hide it. Unless it really needs to be modified from somewhere else... (e.g. unit tests..), but then, we should find a solution, where this field can stay private."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "is this exhaustive? or rather, any psudo header started with `:` is un-parsable/invalid in HTTP/1 right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this change implying something or just seems fit b/c regardless of outcome the sessions should still be length 1?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Maybe throw an exception if there is more than one, so that discovering the lack of support is easier when someone tries to use it down the road."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this route.",
+      "reference": "Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I feel the name of this function could be better, conveying it's a predicate. Something like `HasDockerTestEnvironment` or `CanRunLocalServerTests`, etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This seems unrelated to your PR, how did this end up in here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid",
+      "reference": "Is `username` expected to be case insensitive?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (from `gofmt`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use use",
+      "reference": "Is there any point to the deprecation? If someone was using these APIs, can they continue to do so in any meaningful fashion now that you've disconnected them from the PMD internals? Normally \"compiles but doesn't work\" is considered a bug."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be changed.",
+      "reference": "You can remove the `QItemSelection` import in this file now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Use `std::shared_lock` and `std::try_to_lock_t`. BTW. Why we fail on contention?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the webpack.config.js file.",
+      "reference": "Not sure what this actually does, but do you need to add `\"\"` here? Or does `[\".jsx\", \".js\"]` work too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "let's group imports in the order: std third party first party"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "So the tests run only when the db exists? Else everything passes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`Remove` is unclear. It seems the point is to allow the `FifoByteSink` to delete the underlying file. There seems to be an implicit contract that consumers of this interface call `Remove` after `Close` without necessarily understanding what `Remove` does. I get that it's a little awkward to have `FifoByteSink` delete the file in `Close`. It would probably be best to just remove this from the interface, since `AddSink` is working with an actual `FifoByteSink`. I would rename it in `FifoByteSync` to `DeleteFile` or `Cleanup` or something that's makes it more clear what's being removed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `types.Address` file.",
+      "reference": "Mentioned elsewhere but repeating again: would be nice to have units (ideally `Size *Bytes`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Do we need to do `install` here?",
+      "reference": "I think a test in `spec/integration` might help keep this file a bit more manageable, especially since we're just checking file contents and errors. But basically the same idea!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This spec can be modified, giving you extra strength (Check this fetch key doesn't work and therefore returns `nil`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));)););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););););",
+      "reference": "So this means that we can remove a callback via instr_set_label_callback(). Maybe consider adding another API function for removal, and add a new assert here such that cb!= NULL?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why are we using an instance variable instead of accessing the visibility method?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Ok. Can we just disable this linter?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this is `test_data` and all other instances are `testdata` - does this change affect any test files, or are there actually no directories called `test_data` in the repo? (I just checked, it seems like there aren't...)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the base path. I don't think we should change the base path, but I don't think we should change the base path.",
+      "reference": "Fixing `lint` warnings that have existed for a while."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to true.",
+      "reference": "Better to rename this to CASDefaultCstorSparsePool."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to close the client.",
+      "reference": "Since we'e not 100% sure if `close` will be called more than once, should we set `client` to `null` or add an `AtomicBoolean closed` that will then handle the idempotency issue?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "And here - what happens if name id is invalid"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "__toString() is not a part of QueryInterface"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: Could you add an empty line between `import datetime` (built-in library block) and `import numpy as np` (third-party library block)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Please remove `HIP_UNSUPPORTED`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Having boolean parameters to change function behavior is not a good practice because it violates the principle of functions being responsible for a single task, so the need for this indicates we need to split something out of here instead. We can introduce a function like `getCurrentDateRangeDayCount` or similar, which does this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Is this not required?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "savedStates is for confirmed states, not needed in working set"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `RegisterServiceDefinitionUnserializer` method.",
+      "reference": "Why should we move it into `bootstrap.go` file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "In the next major version, I plan on changing the em-unit breakpoints to be pixel values to keep everything consistent. Would be great to handle this with pixels as well, but still allow em-units to be defined with a string"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this will actually align the indexes, if you have > 100 tabs, the tabs over 100 will be misaligned. In addition with less than 10 tabs, there will be a pointless space."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "hrm, unsigned headers now won't be included."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "what if `$value ='' `?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "What about using `!files.hasNext` instead? I'm not sure we want to assume that the iterable can be consumed multiple times. Plus there's no need to consume the entire iterable just to check whether it is empty."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think we could add bool addArticle here defaulted to false like its done in item class so std::string Container::getName(bool addArticle /* = false*/) const { and pass that variable to getNameDescription call"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "What if a library function on the outside still calls the old method? It is then no longer blocked properly. Have you tested the change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "@i110 Do you have an idea on how we should propagate errors that occur in this block? The error condition happens when i) `h2o_buffer_reserve` fails to allocate space (happens in master as well), or ii) `fill_cb` returns an error (unique to this PR)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Does this mean the times will show up in emails as UTC?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What's the motivation for having one of these be a cycle and the other be a fixed color?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "What will be an empty entry now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `manualColumnResize` class.",
+      "reference": "Can I ask you to add jsdoc tag that would mark the prop as `@private`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should check if the path is a directory or not.",
+      "reference": "Do you need this? Don't think you use it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `RemoteViewsService` class.",
+      "reference": "`this.` seems unnecessary"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: can be removed before merging..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "Maybe a single quote would be compatible with airbnb style."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is not the right approach. The `Distributor` maintains a model of the current state of the Grid. That model already contains the information about every active session. We don't need to modify `SessionMap` to expose it further."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "@Marwes @wolffcm This is the file where I made a change the the expected output. Its a little bit weird, but I think that the final output makes sense for the most part."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We should not halt execution if the apptype is not set.",
+      "reference": "I think we probably need a util.Warning() here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Let's make have a signature that's consistent with `PhysicalKey.from_path`. Users should also have access to PhysicalKey since that class is part of the API (e.g., `Package.resolve_hash`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "What is this directive for?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "I'd rephrase it as `Simplify chained comparison between the operands`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "so in the performance data fixtures, there will be references for the second domain only?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This is wildly unhelpful to users --- they need to know when a proxy has been registered."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "If there is no authority header (i.e. someone intentionally deleted it), I would argue we probably don't want a Host header in the replay either. How about we only add it if it exists, and do nothing otherwise?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "is there any unit test that can be updated to verify this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "exiting at this point is leaking memory, take a look at the valgrind output. the sbuffer must be destroyed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this option should be set to True.",
+      "reference": "i think you want a different flag and help like `--ffmpeg` or something; and you need to mark any tests you want skipped"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `protobuf/protobuf/protobuf.go` file.",
+      "reference": "this needed to change? or it was just some formatting thing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What's the advantage of doing it this way over, say, changing the `.circleci/config.yaml` to have `TRACE` as the `root.log.level`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "typo: if -> of"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It'll be interesting to see who or what this breaks..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "This change is incorrect: the current log level is correct."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "There are few cases like this where default logger is used from CLI/db tools. I would copy `NewTestLogger` to `NewCLILogger` and use it everywhere in CLI. In future these two might be different."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `AuthenticationToken` class. I don't think we should move this into the `AuthenticationToken` class. I think it would be better to move this into the `AuthenticationToken` class.",
+      "reference": "While it provides re-use, this method does not make sense in `AbstractAuthenticationToken` because it knows nothing of a hash key. Instead, we should move this to a private method within each subclass."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "index by memory address? I realize I don't understand why we don't just build a list :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Not part of this commit, but we thought that this may not be a good place for this url, as it is in the `/user/` namespace (effectively preventing us having a user called `lastfmscraper`, however rare it may be)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Does not appear to be used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "I think this starts a new `powershell.exe` interpreter each time, which is pretty slow to run a single command. Can we just do `on(bolt, \"cmd /c #{bolt_command}\")`? /cc @Iristyle"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we add a `collection?` method to the `VideoPage` so we don't violate Law of Demeter here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Deleting unused code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "`PseudoSampler` can also be imported from `..bbox`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Could you move this import to where the other `github.com/algorand/go-algorand` imports are?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'd rather not activate this protocol by default for now, unless there is a good reason for that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Remove these 2 blank lines."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be printed.",
+      "reference": "Want to remove this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "is this a golint requirement? huh. mixed feelings :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Generally with these tests please split up these tests so that there is a different test for each method"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Should something use the lock passed in?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Is this dependant on some version of Docker? Do we need to include both or `volumes` is deprecated (or just wrong!?)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I know this is not new code, but should we change `leader.getState() == State.ACTIVE` to `leader.isActive(liveNodes)`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a",
+      "reference": "Why not use ASTAnyTypeDeclaration? AbstractAnyTypeDeclaration is deprecated"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to import `save` here.",
+      "reference": "A blank line at the very end of each file should eliminate the \"No EOF\" warning we see above"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "These would both be more robust with `errors.As` so that we could safely chain errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is checking the same condition twice?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Aren't we able to handle the case where we have MPI-CUDA without NCCL, even if it's suboptimal?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "Wouldn't we want to namespace this `AA` or something similar"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This probably should look beyond envConfig, and include `aws.Config.Credentials` as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter filter",
+      "reference": "How does this filter differ from TooExpensiveTxFilter?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Use \" List\" instead of ArrayList in declaration."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "we might consider hard throwing when name is None since that is explicitly not working right now and then linking to issue in the exception error message"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "..............................................,................................................................................................................................................................................................................",
+      "reference": "Just noticed this - why \"like\" and not straight \"=\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "is this a new test? if yes, isn't it better to check for each env var is present, and the value, instead of a count?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.",
+      "reference": "when will lost exception? by my test, never happened."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "You should re-stringify it here with `QUrl.FullyEncoded`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "i'm not sure why the quit channel is needed in this context"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "When `args.MemoryLimit` is empty, will `MustParse` panic?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "How soon after this will Apply() be called? It would be a shame if there was still a significant delay before a missing or superfluous route was corrected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I add a `idx` property, and it is only use for benchmark `heap.Remove`, is it acceptable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file is covered by the GNU General Public License.",
+      "reference": "daemonic t got inserted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This edit is non-essential."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Might be safer to ponyfill this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "why was this join not necessary before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Here we compare to the expected call count 3. Because 3 TermsEnum are created: it is a PrefixQuery and there is one TermsEnum created for AutomatonQuery.intersect() (the next call timeout check is skipped once), then 2 TermsEnum created for the 2 matching terms \"one\" and \"ones\"). Would it be clearer to have a separate test method? We could index more docs, for example 50 with a prefix-generated term (e.g. \"term\"+increment). There would be a PrefixQuery for \"term\", the same test code, and we would test the TIMEOUT_CHECK_SAMPLING: - 1 TermsEnum for Automaton.intersect(), and the next calls would be sampled (50/TIMEOUT_CHECK_SAMPLING=3) => call count +4 - 1 TermsEnum for each enumerated term => call count +50 We could verify call count = 54 (instead of 101 without sampling)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Add `--format` as an option. Does it make sense to have all display options available? Also need to add `--inventoryfile` and possibly the global_config_options."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "Any thoughts on making this false by default? My suggestion is make this opt-in. Storing exception is somewhat expensive, so lets do this only if users opt-in"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `",
+      "reference": "usually I do either ` IOException|RuntimeException` or if doing Throwable, use propagateIfFatal"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))..............................................................................................................",
+      "reference": "Wondering whether it should be `self.clone`, or `other.clone` or maybe a new `DynamicMap` declaration entirely. I see this is in the condition where `other` is a `DynamicMap`but is this definitely right in terms of `kdims`? I need to think about it more..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this. I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.",
+      "reference": "I chose a new category because over time I'd like to add metrics also for Authorization plugins and Auditlog plugins (all components registered in security.json). An alternative could have been `CONTAINER` I guess?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this should be `IotxAddressLength = 41`",
+      "reference": "IoAddrLen Golang prefers short variable names"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "PHPCR-ODM does not allow blank aliases.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This seems trivial to forge. Can we tie this into the authentication code paths somehow so that we can really trust that the request is coming from a server instead of just some application claiming to be a server?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a separate header file.",
+      "reference": "Why are you including ``?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "So previously health check was consuming from the normal metrics queue, now we duplicate the data to a new queue? I feel like there should be more changes to ensure the health check handler reads from the new queue? @DrewZhang13"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Yep, looks right; your new selector _should_ disqualify the rule from being XDP accelerated."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "cc @anurse This exists now. Kestrel currently passes the current time to all callbacks as an optimization. Just an FYI."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error. I don't think it should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error. I don't think it should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error. I don't think it should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error. I don't think it should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "remove 3.8+ f-string format to allow use in google colab"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))/((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Should we assert that xstate is aligned here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "any particular reason for suppressing this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Hot take: could this instead become `NO_DIFFICULTY_BOMB` and have` HOMESTEAD` wrap it? So this comes first then homestad with the bomb adjustment, making no difficulty the base case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I suggest to use a scheme like \"blobvar\". \"blob\" would potentially collide if we have another API that use the blob package as a driver."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This assumes that the user has at least one listen, it should have a guard around it, because this won't always be the case"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a localized string.",
+      "reference": "Seems like a lot of unintended changes. Are your line break settings causing these?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "@StrikerRUS what if we just removed build numbers and did `r-pkgdown=1.3.0`? Won't we have to fix this again if the RTD build machines change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file is part of the RDKit. This file is part of the RDKit.",
+      "reference": "I'm not arguing with it, but how did you decide to make this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.",
+      "reference": "1: D400 First line should end with '.', not 'd' 4: I102 copyright year is outdated, expected 2014 but got 2012 25:29: E126 continuation line over-indented for hanging indent 31: D103 Docstring missing 40: D103 Docstring missing 57: D103 Docstring missing 68: D103 Docstring missing 101: D103 Docstring missing 115: D401 First line should be imperative: 'Call', not 'Calls' 115: D400 First line should end with '.', not 't' 134: D400 First line should end with '.', not 'e' 134: D205 Blank line missing between one-line summary and description"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Explain that this must match the `CommonName` of the first (or is it last?) certificate in the chain, where the first certificate is the chain root CA and the last certificate is the leaf certificate."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value for cold_start and cold_start. I think it would be better to have a default value for cold_start and cold_start in cold_start and cold_start in cold_start and cold_start in cold_start and cold_start in cold_start and cold_start in cold_start and cold_start in cold_start.",
+      "reference": "do we really need this behavour to be configurable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Hmm interesting. Do the tests check out on this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")##############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "For another PR, another `--X` candidate."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Do we need to add this constant for `group_windows.go`? Otherwise, I believe the build will fail on windows. Also what do you think of adding the emoji at the end? The windows one could be plain."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the test class.",
+      "reference": "this is a junit 3 import, not a junit 4"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "shouldn't there be a reque expected here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "I prefer to make it `protected set`. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm fine with that.",
+      "reference": "Maybe rename this to JetStreamStoreDir?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "You can start by logging out the error"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "In general, what is the reason for the fallback price to be public? If it is public, why does it take baseFeePerGas instead of a block header?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.",
+      "reference": "follow-up of #2002"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate thread, not in a separate thread.",
+      "reference": "could you give some explanations of what problem do you want to solve by this change, and how/why it works?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "LongLivedMarshalByRefObject exists in both the netstandard and netfx xunit?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "the bridge here isn't defined as an accessor / reader to try mask it better. So you need to directly call the iVar `@bridge` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Testing on linux with this change, containerd no longer stops when k3s stops."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the connection flow controller.",
+      "reference": "Maybe [u]int64 to be consistent with other byte-valued vars in this struct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This brings up the question... do we need to start assigning users to the different use cases in some way? We don't want this link to show up for Ric, for example."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should use prefetch_full_()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()",
+      "reference": "Unless I'm misunderstanding something, this should just be `prefetch_(param.data_param().prefetch())`, no? That should just use the default value if there's no explicit `data_param` or `data_param.prefetch` set, removing the need to also duplicate and hardcode `PREFETCH_COUNT`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "nit : move this into a default clause in the previous switch statement."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It should be return \"''\"; I will fix it"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Go standard linter hates `Id`s and likes `ID`s, please do not resist."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think retrying here is as useful, since `git-checkout` doesn't access the network AFAIK, and if it fails once it's probably going to fail all three times."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Fixing this typo caused a build failure in `cmd/ctl/pkg/status/certificate/certificate_test.go:238` Could you also update it there?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to have a `extension_condition = lambda pkt: pkt.extension_condition`",
+      "reference": "Please note that adding this will import `extension_condition` in the entire scapy (as you are located in a layer). You might want to move this inside the RTP class? Would be better i think"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This will need updating, as I'm not sure we'll want to turn on random ordering if they've specified a seed for programmatic use."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Are you sure these are all client libs? This seems fragile: if we later load sthg else early this will break. Seems best to have some kind of sanity check: at least add an assert in the current location where this is set."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a separate line for each molecule accession number. I don't think we should add a separate line for each molecule accession number.",
+      "reference": "Picking nits here, but as a Dictionary already is a collection of KeyValuePairs there's undoubtably a way to code this that doesn't involve constructing any new ones."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "As Miklas stated, please avoid wildcard imports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Maybe change it to `module.exports = server`? Becase there's nothing else to export here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this import.",
+      "reference": "This may be an automated change, but the import seems to fit better where it was previously."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Might we want to separate including this snippet and sending the data for signed in users into different partials?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This function will ignore peers with addresses provided in skipPeers. This function will ignore peers with addresses provided in skipPeers.",
+      "reference": "closest to the address"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this?",
+      "reference": "It should be much more clear for end-user"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Isn't this an example that this will be prone to false positives? We had nothing to fix in the codebase (And I think there is dict that could be named tuple in the MessageStore/MessageIdStore), but we have a false positives on our checkers."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "We control `octest`, so it shouldn't be necessary to provide struct literal keys. This is a case of vet being too picky."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to 50.00",
+      "reference": "I would put that constant under config/initializers/constant.rb and I would leave application.rb for rails specific."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason not to do something like `if _, ok := doNotUnref[ptr.ID]; ok { return ops }` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "This would return a tuple of two dictionaries. You need to combine them and return a dictionary"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why not always forward it to `_data`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "there are tests that use `client.get` which will fail now"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Whoa, TIL about this syntax."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is a smell. When is this valid? Perhaps this should be `nil, nil, ErrNoResponse` or some such. While it is usually invalid to have neither a return value or error, we rarely check for the case in other idiomatic Go. Nothing wrong with extra defenses here, but think about it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model.",
+      "reference": "This URL is outdated, add a `TODO` to fix it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`ChainID()` is a getter method, move up to `Nonce()`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "If this condition is not met, shall we just throw the exception rather than logging it? @li-ygerchikov Your thoughts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: alpha-sort `ruamel.yaml` in this list please"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "Remove this because we already added it in another pr"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move the file into the `shortcutDTO.getIcon()` class.",
+      "reference": "Can we maybe move the `File` creation to a new method? I mean both changes look equal to me with the difference of two parts, which could be specified using two input parameters."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think we want to require the association with the user...?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I am unsure the below implementation is correct, but need this method to not panic else it borks the chain-validation tests."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: no need this change anymore."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This isn't really that closely related to everything else in this PR, but I'm pretty sure it's a correct change. I'm not familiar enough with the taint feature to know how to test it, but I worry that without this change some of the taint stuff might mess up the `parent_nodes` for a reference."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "[Checkstyle] ERROR: Unused import - javaslang.collection.Stream."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The numbers were changed since now _root_ is also added to the doc, increasing the field count by 1."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "TTemplateParamClass is handled above with the same content in the conditional"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "Do we need to add `theme` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "i think you have to regen the api stuff, `make generate`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `Signature` and not a `Signature`.",
+      "reference": "DataHash shouldn't be needed here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "`info` was chosen deliberately to mirror the old behaviour that users expected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `component.get('selection').toArray()`",
+      "reference": "For some reason, Safari handles ember arrays differently than Chrome/Firefox. To get around that, we cast the ember array to a regular array to verify the deep equal. (Note: I tried wrapping the expected value in an emberA - which would look like `expect(someEmberArray).to.deep.equal(emberA(['a', 'b']));` but that didn't work either)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "`icebergType` indicates the corresponding iceberg type of the `FieldVector` `originalIcebergType` indicates what the real type we will read from the `FieldVector`. For example, the parquet int backed decimal, the `icebergType` should be integer, `originalIcebergType` is decimal. I intend to only keep the `originalIcebergType`, but listening to your ideas."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "The double (and thus triple as seen below) pointer gives me pause. I could imagine providing some larger API surface to smooth it out, but it's likely not worth it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "The test name as written was grammatically correct, but now it isn't. Both 'MongooseError' and 'instance' should be both singular or both plural."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "SmartStoreInspectorTest was throwing a NPE here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "We prefer line wrapping that keeps arguments to the same method aligned rather than aligning arguments to different levels. Here, the lambda to create an `InternalRecordWrapper` is an argument to `transform`, but it is aligned with `deleteSchema.asStruct()` that is an argument to the outer `toEqualitySet` call. Instead, can you add a newline for each argument to `toEqualitySet`? If the line with the lambda is too long, then you can also add a newline for it that it indented from the start of the line with `transform`, so it is clear that it is an argument to `transform` and not `toEqualitySet`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think it would be a good idea to wrap this in an if like the stats above, just in case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "@angmas1 just make one more change here too. Move the else line to the line above it, where the if block ends and remove the braces like in line 280."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Looks like the actual rename is missing in this commit edit: Arf, nevermind, I was at the wrong commit"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'm a little stuck understanding, how would this result in an error when `this.opts.params` is not set? It will just not do `AssemblyOptions.validateParams(this.opts.params)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in this PR.",
+      "reference": "networkVarPattern (etc) then?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need the block here.",
+      "reference": "I think it makes sense to do `metadata[:block].clone`, as thats what `new_metadata` is, but somehow it's missing the block from its clone."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ClosureAnalyzer` class. I don't think we should move this to the `ClosureAnalyzer` class.",
+      "reference": "Just realized this should be fixed instead of changing here. Concatenating int should still result in lowercase string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "For Se 3.x we shouldn't need to specify `marionette: true`? I'll see if I can figure out where this is getting used that it might be necessary here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This should be renamed to `chain.Store`. It was named `DefaultStore` as an alternative to `StoreImpl`, which is the (bad) Java convention."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is deviceName not given explicitly, device name will be the same as disk name. If deviceName is not given explicitly, device name will be the same as disk name. If deviceName is not given explicitly, device name will be the same as disk name. If deviceName is not given explicitly, deviceName will be the same as disk name.",
+      "reference": "ad.Source is disk name? Shouldn't the order of initialization be reversed here then? First set ad.DeviceName, if it's empty, set ad.Source? Or this is a different use case? This is the third place where this device/disk default logic is implemented, so another reason to move it to regAttach, if it's possible to be generalized."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "typo: \"be hold\" -> \"be held\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I do not think we should have any logic inside the null storage. 1 has a very specific magical meaning. We should either return null here or long.maxValue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why did this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Removed this method. Doesn't seem to be used in the code, and the variable set here doesn't seem to be used in the views."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove the initializers (\"`= null`\") from both parameters. Remember that that's why we added the overloads: to ensure that all languages could have the convenience of the abbreviated argument lists (not all languages understand default parameters)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think you can just remove most of these attributes outside of `ElementType()`. Instead, this should expose the arrow array. We're not going to use these methods anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to import remove from './remove'",
+      "reference": "Thinking this should be `removeNode()` exported from `dom/index.js`. Thoughts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Does this need to be saved in the state file? Or are we recomputing when the task is read from the state file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Looks like `s.inserts` and `s.removes` are updated under sublist's lock, so I don't think you need atomic for those 2."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "@TD-er use bitRead/bitWrite macros, do you use here inversed logic?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future. I think it would be better to move this into the `fetch-mock-jest.php` file.",
+      "reference": "The previous `fetch` mock was exposed globally before - can we do the same with `fetchMock` so we don't need to import it in every file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is ExpectData still used anywhere?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Do you want to allow the character `.` or any character? Because inside a regex `.` means any character, if you want to authorize `.` then you need to add `\\.`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "`eachAsync()` should pass a doc, not an array of docs, to the callback. This would be a massive breaking change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a warning here.",
+      "reference": "please start log with caps letters"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should render this in the view. I'm not sure if we should render this in the view, but I don't think that's the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Is this where we want it in relation to the other scripts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Please wrap this variable within a self invoking anonymous function. (function(){ FEATURE_NAME = \"reports\"; //and rest of the js goes here. })();"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Haven't tried, but what happens currently if `-f` is used and it's not running? (thinking: `-f` should ignore the case and just proceed?) I see we have a special case for `all`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "no need for custom errors in tests unless the tests are intended to mock a specific sort of error"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This const has already existed in the code, no need to define a new one"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.",
+      "reference": "Would Errorf be better than Warnf?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "A good candidate for StringBuilder? Also make sure to add white space around the operators (`path + \"/\" + file`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Can we have the same argument order as `getUploadedFlowFile`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this dynamic config should still be valid, i.e. operator should have the ability to control each individual task queue just in case"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Should these cases be logged? `if not obj` used to be"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is it OK to assume that keys.gnupg.net has the new key?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line to this file.",
+      "reference": "A note for however is curious. I think these two notes add negative value only. In general we want people to implement this method (in particular after this patch). If we leave these old (and currently mis-rendered) notes, file system implementors might not implement this method referring to this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Comparators (or functions in general) cannot be compared for equality. Therefore `PriorityQueue.of(comparator,...)` always has to return a new instance."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It's a little surprising that CachedThreadPool overrides the max_threads argument. This makes sense as a solution though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an error if reduction is None.",
+      "reference": "```python # if avg_factor is not specified, just reduce the loss if avg_factor is None: loss = reduce_loss(loss, reduction) else: # if reduction is mean, then average the loss by avg_factor if reduction =='mean': loss = loss.sum() / avg_factor # if reduction is 'none', then do nothing, otherwise raise an error elif reduction!= 'none': raise ValueError('avg_factor can not be used with reduction=\"sum\"')"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`padding` should be 0 instead. Actually you can just remove padding and dilation to use default values."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "$balance is initialized to 0 above in line 1428 and then assigned in line 1437. If we're no longer manipulating that value, is there a reason to use a variable at all? It might make the overall code less confusing to make some changes there."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need to explicitly use keyword arguments?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Might still want to log this as `TargetBuilding` but with a slightly different message?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "ref. above, this also can be omitted in case `txt = std::move(other.txt);` could work (or copy), consider `std::array;`? or a custom object implementing `Object& operator=(Object&&) noexcept;'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "Well done, we forget that one apparentely."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((())))))))))))(((((())))))))((((((())))))))(((((((((((()))))))))))((((((())))))))((((((((())))))))))((((((((((((())))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Guess it isn't used. The dask thing was just a prototype so removing it is probably the right thing to do."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.",
+      "reference": "This code is correct, but it's a bit confusing to see how (e.g., without the if startswith(\".') the or below would break.) I think it will be clearer for the long run if you refactor this just a bit. CONTENT_INDEX_EXTS (all caps) looks like a constant, but is now being set by the environment. Instead, replace the reference to CONTENT_INDEX_EXTS in index.py with a simple call to a method \"get_content_index_exts\" (or similar). Then you can write all the logic into one clean function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "please update the zms conf file to have a small description of these options since by default feature is off and must be enabled"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should be `this.opts` instead of `defaultOptions`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "You can reuse `USERS` above as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Whoa, was this opto breaking something? I guess if this final path is filtered out, we still need the queue? Have you run the suggest benchmarks to see if removing this opto hurt performance?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure about this, please check the usages. It's only used currently to reverse it, maybe we should eliminate this method completely instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a check for list tags enabled. I don't think we should have a check for list tags enabled. I think it would be better to have a check for list tags enabled and a check for list tags enabled.",
+      "reference": "Since this is only used in the MyResearchController, does it need to be placed at the AbstractBase level?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "why `PhaseSelector`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `whitelisted_modules` field.",
+      "reference": "Does` AllowlistedModules` have the same meaning of `WhitelistedModules`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `array_chunk` or `array_chunk`?",
+      "reference": "I missed the $preserve_keys=true case when adding this to Phan. For psalm, two separate signatures may make sense"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "TcpServer will be created for each HighwayServerVerticle instance so the counter number in server is not correct."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Why change this from a foreach? I can't see it gaining anything here and code styles shouldn't change just for the sake of it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'd say \"cgroup2 hybrid path\" instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I dont see a reason to print URI for `Target`. we do not expose that in inventory v1"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do we still need this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`campaignSource` is unused (from `structcheck`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "we should discuss how to not hard-code this version"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.",
+      "reference": "do we have a doclet for this event?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.",
+      "reference": "Why don't we want to catch segfaults by default?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "You could probably dispose request & content if you `await` the SendAsync."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why is this test case here? this file is for testing functionalities in utils.py"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "why do we have an env var for this? not sure why we'd want to suppress welcome emails but not any others"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "drop the todo?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Maybe use { } here like we are most other places now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I want to get PartitionData field type, I don't know how to get it in other way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `Get(addr, false)`",
+      "reference": "I think that a single `Get` method would be preferable, that would have the following parameters: Get(addr basics.Address, withPendingRewards bool, cidx basics.CreatableIndex, ctype basics.CreatableType) where we ignore cidx of -1, and adding support for ctype of \"AssetParams\" or something like that. (i.e. so that this Get call would be good for asset holding/asset params and applications )"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This can handle the '\\\\' problem, but if (not possible) the user define '\\\\' as null, this logic will break. So here, it should be to compare the whole HIVE_DEFAULT_NULL_STRING, and make sure length is equal, as I understand. \\N is NULL, but \\NA is not NULL, what will happen if there is \\NAA?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Hmm, I would think that anyone who can edit the request should be able to delete the observation, in case they accidentally add the wrong person or something."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I know we are doing this other places already. It would be good to refactor this and the paginable publicly_visible so that we are DRY. Can wait until after MVP though when we do general cleanup"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "I think this should read \"is always observed before\" or \"is never observed after\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file should be renamed to \"authors\".",
+      "reference": "You might consider adding yourself as an author of the class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "If this fails, then'stderr' is not a valid file handler anymore, and then any further 'write' operations will fail. Maybe some handling of such situation should be added here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Break out tests for events into their own tests rather than placing them in other ones. That makes it easier for us to figure out where problems lie and to do a TDD-driven implementation over new APIs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think your indentation is wrong here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "UT spotted that we weren't marking routes dirty when they targeted at Node and that node's IP changed. e.g., the case where a WEP appears in the syncer before the corresponding node does, so we don't know the node's IP. I added a new map to track the CIDRs for each node so that when the node IP changes we can mark those CIDRs dirty. Right now it's only used for the \"WorkloadIPs\" scenario. Need to decide if the same issue applies in the \"CalicoIPAM' case. I suspect it might. It looks like we have some logic present to detect when our own node IP changes, but we don't seem to handle when a remote node's IP changes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Given this will 'pause' bolt for a few seconds on older rubies, perhaps emit a debug message saying \"Warming up OpenSSL\" or something to that effect"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to None.",
+      "reference": "Initializing _format to None, but asserting that it's not None later, seems unnecessarily fragile. We shouldn't architect the package class to rely on classes or methods that use it (e.g., build). Let's at least set the format to the default in case we don't create all packages through build.py."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `WebElement` interface.",
+      "reference": "This change should also probably go into the corresponding method of the abstract By class?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `UnresolvableConstant` instead of `UnresolvableConstant`.",
+      "reference": "Should this be set to something else?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Whats up with this? It looks like this is rendered on purchases/new for subscribers, so it would result in a dead end?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a method.",
+      "reference": "Glad to see this generalized to support the backend argument."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in ListDeploymentChains"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'd say the format like `\"xxx: %w\"` is more convention when wrapping an error basically. You refered to anything like this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "This seems relatively high, is it the recommended value from the etcd folks? Or is this debugging cruft?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This requires updating the name in the `endpoints` tests, please run `make test`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "LOG(FATAL) means coredump, LOG(ERROR) is better here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "/javascript/firefox-driver is the Selenium implementation of a WebDriver for Firefox. Since it generally isn't W3C compatible, it shouldn't change. We can just drop this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It's a bit weird to have `svc.go` to include a `ScheduledJobType`...should we rename this file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.",
+      "reference": "For some reason `protoc` doesn't copy license header from `proto` files to generated code. But this code will never be checked in, so it is ok."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to update existing record if it has a pumpId.",
+      "reference": "I don't know what the implications of this change are for pumps other than the insight but i would add `|| trList2.get(0).pumpId == temporaryBasal.pumpId` in case we see the same pump event again, in order to not duplicate it in the database."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "is there anything still referencing `checksumAddress` or can we just delete it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this condition is needed.",
+      "reference": "The reason I didn't suggest it before is because I didn't want alerts for every tried - but not updated provision, but I can see a value in it from OSD perspective"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I believe Key is not necessarily nil, it could be empty string. Probably better check a.Kind == Create"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This is only used for headers and therefore isn't used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command. I don't think we should add the `skip_import` to the command.",
+      "reference": "Wouldn't it make sense to add a files_import_command and a db_import_command, which could be empty? I guess that leads to potential backward-compatibility problems, but it's worth thinking about. Perhaps add an import-api version to solve that? Overall, I think the actual db import logic and files import logic should be moved into the yaml file. What you you think of that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Why do we have this here? I'm not concerned about it really, just curious."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "@justicz Why are these switched here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Maybe verify that an anchor was created -- that the markdown was processed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Is this just a minor improvement or is it necessary? If just some minor improvement, I recommend you don't touch Lucene in a Solr PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))).endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "why delete this method?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "Does this transform only the `MethodContext`, or also the `OutputContext`? (Looking at the other files, I gather it's the latter.) Might be helpful to mention that here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.",
+      "reference": "Could you please clean-up this line while at it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the secret to the config file.",
+      "reference": "no need to use a pointer. Just string and check for!= \"\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "this means h2 mode? but how h2c can work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this file should be renamed to \"explorer.py\"",
+      "reference": "This line should not be there"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why do we need lock here? if needed, then we also need to lock in Start()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this should be on default-switch, uhm? else you will handle twice (c++ and lua). I'm just saying..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "unrelated minor fix"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to false.",
+      "reference": "can you add `, echo: false` to the end of this as well. I don't think we need to echo this to the log. You might need to update the spec as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This test does not really verify that we're doing the correct thing now, is it? It seems to pass with and without the patch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log.SetTag(ctx, \"block\", b)",
+      "reference": "should just be able to defer the call directly here too"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this a magic number? I assume this makes it look better."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Would welcome a stringification method on big.Int in specs-actors"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "PersistBlockLevelInfo -> UpdateBlockLevelInfo"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model. I don't think we should add this to the model.",
+      "reference": "Type is redundant since it is inherited."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be null.",
+      "reference": "better use `!isView()` so that we don't need to modify multiple lines in future."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I know you don't usually open up the singleton class, but I was getting a `private method called` error when trying to use `self.attr_writer` - any idea?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "There's no need to create a new variable here, the other checks just use the item type directly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the query.",
+      "reference": "Any other possible names? Feels like going with \"workshop\" for this product_type could increase the confusion between course/workshop in the codebase."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@eugene-manuilov Isn't this already taken care of by `fetchGetURLChannels` via `createFetchStore`? Why is the extra `receiveError` call needed here? (This was already in the IB, but just struck me while reviewing here.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: should go before `grpc`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Why not using the Cancel? I thought cancelling a \"parent\" context would cascade to \"children\" contexts, cancelling them as well. In short, how does cancel work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((()))))))((((((((()))))))))((((((((((())))))))((((((((()))))))(((((((())))))((((((()))))))(((((((())))))))((((((((())))))))))(((((((",
+      "reference": "Could you explain why we default to binary now? It seems it's safer to default to text to avoid stuff getting executed or parsed by browsers accidentally. If we need to add support for particular types, we can add them explicitly right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Bit worried about the prefix since this seem to be being used for non-Openstack data too (host endpoints). Should we just leave host endpoint status at the old path (or remove it since AIFAIK, it's not used anywhere)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this as it's not a good practice.",
+      "reference": "This might be a silly question, but what happens to files with durations > 24 hours?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "`AddDiagnosticSourceInstrumentation` method can now be eliminated and simply use `AddInstrumentation`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "I think we also need to add `name:` to the bolt-project.yaml files in `spec/fixtures/projects`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "worth mentioning the same warning here as in `md_util.go`, I think."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Do we need both the checks, for `Items` not nil and `len(Items)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Do you know what this is coming from? It keeps getting deleted/created @nickbristow"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to \"hive-conf-dir\"",
+      "reference": "Nit: leaving these in place would have reduce the number of files that this needed to touch, and avoided a possible problem removing public fields. I don't think it's worth blocking for this change, but we like to keep patches as small as possible by not breaking references like these."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the `AdminController` class. I don't think we should have this in the `AdminController` class, but I don't think we should have it in the `AdminController` class. I don't think we should have this in the `AdminController` class. I think it should be in the `AdminController` class.",
+      "reference": "`The %s is deprecated...` -> `The %s method is deprecated...`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move to specs-actors.",
+      "reference": "No, it wouldn't go there because that code won't reference or enforce it. Here is ok for now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "How will we show that test run aborted (because of a crash) if we don't set aborted to true?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `SocketConnection` class. I don't think we should move this into the `SocketConnection` class. I think we should move this into the `SocketConnection` class. I think we should move this into the `SocketConnection` class. I'm not sure if we should move this into the `SocketConnection` class. I think we should move it into the `SocketConnection` class and move it into the `SocketConnection` class. I think we should move it into the `SocketConnection` class and move it into the `SocketConnection` class. I think we should move it into the `SocketConnection` class and move it into the `SocketConnection` class.",
+      "reference": "Nit: Might as well make this same change to AdaptedPipeline."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Just to clarify: I see that only the hive2 withZone object inspector is changed. Does that mean that the predicate pushdown problem only occurred on hive2?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Based on username requirements for forge.puppet.com - only letters and digits permitted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Was this removed to ignore the extra columns coming from the file projection?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please can you pull out the shared function into a shared file? I think that'd be pretty easy to do for this module. I think you could: - pull out a function `configureSyslog` that is implemented on Linux, but stubbed on Windows - pull out a function `openLogFile` that is implemented differently on each - share everything else"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Instead of hardcoding the AWSEmailProvider here, it should come from properties, so that it can be replaced with another EmailProvider for ZMS vs ZTS"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the `admin_user` and `admin_password` to the `admin_user` and `admin_password` to the `admin_user` and `admin_password` in the `admin_user` and `admin_password` in the `admin_user` and `admin_password` in the `admin_user` and `admin_password` in the `admin_user` and `admin_password` in the `admin_user` and `admin_password` in the `admin_password`.",
+      "reference": "+1 for creating this script to help people get boot strapped"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate file.",
+      "reference": "Do you need the prefix?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "if retcode is < 0, it should return -1 indicating an error."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "Are those necessary? I feel like `useless-suppression` could be avoided here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is this equivalent in JavaScript?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "get/list operation is not schema change, it is supposed to use VLOG"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "we'll need to delete this whole file, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "\"this table hasn't mutated within this transaction\" may sound like implying that if this transaction contains table mutation changes, `refresh` may have impact, which I think is not true? I guess what you were saying was if other transactions committed to this table successfully when this transaction is half way through, refresh in this transaction will still return the same state as when this transaction begins."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this annotation to the `cert-manager.io/request-is-ca` file.",
+      "reference": "Can we move these into some kind of experimental API group? I don't think we want to call them `v1` just yet :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    ",
+      "reference": "I think this makes a lot of sense but we may want to highlight the change for people doing UAT in case the ordering of sections is off anywhere when customizing or using the drag-drop feature"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "These files should in `/javascript/brython`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is a bit unclean, but works properly, since the packet always begins with the public header and we never copy it. This is a bit unclean, but works properly, since the packet always begins with the public header and we never copy it.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure this is the right fix - I'd be more happy with a `continue`. That way, we don't enter the code at the bottom of the run loop (e.g. sending packets). Keep in mind that this error here may be triggered by a peer doing something security-relevant, so I don't think we should do much more work other than sending the close frame."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Can we fix this, or is it going to stay broken."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason to remove this attr?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the top of the file.",
+      "reference": "log message should be started with upper-case word."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "I guess this is not needed anymore now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think I would prefer retaining the argument. It's true that we are not using it now, but it's harmless, it's good to have a constructor function that accepts all the field values as arguments. Performance-wise, it does not matter."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Is this a different fix?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Why not add a `EnterNS` filed instead of `WithoutNS`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Same points as in other test file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I have a PR pending, can you change this bit index to `16`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "we should probably have some utility class for this sort of things"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Curious that I'm not seeing any occurrence of the new error check in this file. Why was it disabled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `Realm~Configuration` class.",
+      "reference": "does it return something?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return a string. I don't think we should return a string, but I don't think we should return a string.",
+      "reference": "This function is also called in various Site Kit module components, where the error object (here `data`) also needs to be passed, otherwise the link to fix the issue won't appear."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "super nit: `revision string` (the passed value might not be a SHA hash)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "@snakefoot why is internal needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why were we disabling health checks before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "did `conftest.py` actually show up for you? `test_files` should never contain it..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Should this be a! on line 565? I would have expected the condition to be similar to line 564. If I am wrong please excuse my mistake."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Please change to `1070400`. I promise to look into this PR in more detail before the 1.7.4 release ;)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `ParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParParPar par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par par",
+      "reference": "Can we change to use `LogicalType.getChildren`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `purchase_method.should == 'free'`",
+      "reference": "I'm confused as to how these are both passing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a link to the page. I don't think we should add a link to the page. I think we should add a link to the page. I don't think we should add a link to the page. I don't think we should add a link to the page. I think we should add a link to the page. I don't think we should add a link to the page, but I don't think we should add a link to the page. I don't think we should add a link to the page.",
+      "reference": "Prefer single-quoted strings when you don't need string interpolation or special symbols."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "there is `\"` sign in commit message and colon. can you rename also `descrition` to plural `descriptions` and add there `$`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to get the timerNoUserLatency?",
+      "reference": "timerNoUserLatency is not being used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool, but I don't think it should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "@lmazuel - I've made a couple of minor changes to serialization.py, if you could do a quick review :) They should not be breaking, and I doubt are used by the existing clients so may not need a new release yet. Effectively it's a change to support default/constant date and datetime values by allowing strings to passed in instead of date or datetime objects. The strings would need to already be in the correct ISO formatting that the request will serialize to. Let me know if you think this is okay."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Why change the name in the XML?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": "This is much cleaner. makes it easier to tell what happens on a save."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `refineFiltersOperator` method.",
+      "reference": "Could you add return error unsupported operator here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `javaslang.collection.StreamModule` and move it to `javaslang.collection.StreamModule`.",
+      "reference": "(Mhh, we seem to use different formatters - we should unify them. I like the wildcards)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `taskqueuepb.TASK_QUEUE_KIND_NORMAL`, not `taskqueuepb.TASK_QUEUE_KIND_NORMAL`.",
+      "reference": "Should `kind` be a command line parameter also?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "can we have it inside FromAccessList?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Why not embed filterASCII in this function?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I am curious, shouldn't \"currentContinuousFlowProcessed++;\" be added right after line 1873? otherwise we will count 1 extra when a exflow wakes up from the sleep section,.even though it hasn't been assigned"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "You can probably move this up after the `._Numeric` line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `SGEJobTask` or a `SGEJobTask`?",
+      "reference": "@Tarrasch this is another change you need to pay attention, it seems `SGEJobTask` is not calling `super.__init__` which break the test case some how."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the index to the table, but I don't think that's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Do we need indices for this table?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "what about making this function static inline to avoid the extra declaration?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the file, but I don't think we should add it to the file.",
+      "reference": "I forget the difference between type definition with \"=\" and without \"=\" again, but can we unify the style? I believe the difference doesn't apply to TableIDType and GroupIDType whatever it is?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "would be `DEPRECATED Percentage of the graph (in vertices) to contract [0..1]` better?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "These command names are specific to Chromium-based browsers. Please move to `ChromiumDriverCommand`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "if we won't use, should we remove this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Having 2 items with the same key (Mvx) won't work in a dictionary"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should redirect to the root path.",
+      "reference": "@cpytel how does the flow work right now? I expect to go to the sign up as customer page after putting in my code, but it goes to the longer landing page?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`event_msg` has the same size (1024) as a `message`. Maybe should be increased to 2048 instead? Then this `\"[error] %.512s\", message` could be changed to this: `\"[error] %.*s\", sizeof(message), message`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this interface should be used.",
+      "reference": "Nit: unnecessary whitespace change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Hit a flake here where I think there may have been some output to stderr that got mixed in with the output from Stdout. Hence switching to `Output()`, which does also capture stderr as `err.Stderr`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "I would use static_cast(0) and static_cast(m_num_labels) just in case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a separate method.",
+      "reference": "Even if we want to keep in original case - domain will be lower-cased."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Based on discussion with Chad it feels like trail_map_json could be a good column name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This array should be logic-less, just the language string (without `Lang::get()`) should appear. Then `trans()` is [or should be] used when the balloon selector renders the values."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this file.",
+      "reference": "This looks like it runs both pre 3.0 rake tasks and 3 rake tasks, and since pre 3.0 we didn't use bundler, my guess is it will fail then."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure the replacement is a good idea, and as I said in #336, this \"parent-name.scope\" is not a good idea in the first place, specially when we support assigning a slice as the parent, so we should change this, WDYT?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "sloppyReassign: re-assignment to `err` can be replaced with `err := kv.WriteBatch(batchForBlock)` (from `gocritic`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "using factory method. return CompletableFuture.completedFuture"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `AnalyticsDashboardWidgetTopPagesTable`",
+      "reference": "The `_x` function needs to be imported at the top of the file (in addition to `__`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "this looks like the only controversial change potentially. @MatthewHinton56 Could let us know why you made this change (which `go vet` warning was triggered)? @wenyingd could you take a look and let us know if you're okay with this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This seems like left-over debugging code. I think I fixed this to no longer be necessary, switching to UserControl for the designer."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be in the `proxy_listener.py` file, not in the `proxy_listener.py` file.",
+      "reference": "As we're currently not applying any logic in the proxy listener, I guess we can simply remove this file (and remove the `listener` argument from the `register_plugin(..)` call above)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Isn't the point of the clock module to encapsulate access to `time.Now()`? Coming later?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "as before - if you've set this, you should be able to get rid of the `os.Setenv(\"ALGOSMALLLAMBDAMSEC\", \"500\")`. make sure that the various tests still takes have the same execution time."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Pretty sure the single quotes here should be double quotes, single quotes are not expanded by the shell."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid",
+      "reference": "these are not really constants, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "import below copyright statement"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`if (is_string($value) && $this->getDefinition()->get('allow_html')) {`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to get rid of this?",
+      "reference": "I think we have the same problem here - if folks called the `public void Add` with a `null` key, we need to use `Guard`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file is part of the RDKit source tree.",
+      "reference": "I thought that the main was in catch_qt.cpp?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "I would rename the field to IMAGE_TYPES and make it an array. I don't think we need list operations. Also, if possible, I would move the field to the ApiFields class. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I'd prefer to timeout on this, but I know it's not a pattern that is being followed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "hmm let's not use * imports please"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "is this configuration key already exist in prometheus?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is needed.",
+      "reference": "As @gravitystorm said new tests need to be using factories, not fixtures."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You can replace IP by hostname."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should say \"why\" NVDA should do things in this order."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "nit these will get changed back during next release."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the build process.",
+      "reference": "it is actually not needed to make the member public. the build tags can also set a package scoped variable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this trait is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We already have a method for it 'icon' => $content->getIcon()"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `aws-sdk-go/service/aws-sdk-go/service.go`",
+      "reference": "Instead of importing `golang.org/x/net/context` The SDK should use `aws.BackgroundContext()` instead of `context.Background()`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this is an agnostic change for the ORM right? Why was it doing this? - this does not work on PHPCR-ODM as the `id` is not a field - although I guess it could be mapped as such."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I'm not 100% sure, but I think this should be `explorable`. If not, I think `explorable` can be removed entirely."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Note to self: Why was this not originally not using `stderrbytes`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is betterLOG_IF(ERROR, status!= 0)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I wouldn't call it default too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Why disable the rule for this file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Thanks for adding this :+1:. Could you please move it to go after the `ctaLink` prop?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "The other way around Current can be null."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "why does it have to be here? Due to breadcrumb navigation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "I fear moving this to some common func. We are swallowing the error here. This might be ok in UT but not in actual source code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "Please don't use \\ as a line continuation. Do an implicit string join instead with parens: ``` (\"Message...\" \"and...\")"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "there needs to be a change here. setting up the batchstore with localstore.Unreserve hook"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?",
+      "reference": "I think if we can provide a more convenient method to add configs. e.g. public static void addConfig(String k, Object v)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "line is 165 characters"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `OceanBaseValueHandlerProvider` class.",
+      "reference": "Please add a copyright notice. Also, could you tell me please why do we need this empty provider here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I feel like this would be easier to read if we join the two if's together: `if (maybePrivacyGroup.isEmpty() &&!privacyController.isGroupAdditionTransaction(privateTransaction))`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to catch this exception.",
+      "reference": "Tests are failing because the exception type is NullPointException here if the soupBlob is deleted (so instead of a mal-format json, it's a null)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Glad we fixed this as well. Blockly is going to be left as-is for this case, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I had accidentally deprecated this class. This is meant to stick around. Only `SalesforceObjectType` goes away."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`hex(i)[2:]` is trying to do the same thing above. what is `i` in your malformed case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "ShouldEscape is true?",
+      "reference": "I think this change is redundant; see the previously defined method \"writeUnescapedXML\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Ah now I have at least some idea what these are for."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I believe in previous PRs @mccheah frequently used `fileSchema` -> `newFileSchema` type of renames to avoid hiding fields in builders. Would it make sense to make it consistent?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the `connect` method.",
+      "reference": "Do we really need separate error in manager if utils.ErrRequestCancelled is the only error which indicates cancelation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Leave as `cpp` since that still gives better results."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "temp change so the predicate can be used by the `exp` package"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Just as a tiny clarification, this isn't affected in any way by \"speak typed characters\". That is, \"caps lock on\", etc. is always spoken, even if speak typed characters is off."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This should be pipelined somehow.",
+      "reference": "@dgoodwin Will it cause an issue when the issue get fixed in OLM?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This option is now unnecessary"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Don't jump down to the unexported interface: just set the content type to `\"application/octet-stream\"` explicitly when creating the `Writer`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Instead of counting this here on clear, can we use a second counter for the deleteTerms next to `bytesUsed`? This would be great. It doesn't need to be thread safe IMO"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the validation rules.",
+      "reference": "@daftspunk @bennothommo I wonder if we need to go as deep as detecting what the default varchar length is with a special character to be parsed by the validation trait since we've introduced the config for it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Also update line 2205 below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Typo, should read `firstTimeEmptySubject`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a new package.",
+      "reference": "The more I see this the more I think the transport layer _should_ actually refer to this as `UnaryHandler`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The `warn` message here seems to indicate that the forced closure of the SSH connection should raise an error; is that getting swallowed up somewhere and not raising?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if this is a fitting name. Why \"expands user\"? Wouldn't be `user_expanded` or so be more fitting?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I see what you are doing here, but to stay with the `getter/setter` pattern, should we introduce `set isHidden(value)` & `get isHidden()` which them maintains `_isHidden` with in `vNodeCache`. This will avoid what looks like accessing an internal property like `_isHidden` from `axe.utils.isHidden` & keeps things neat."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "nit: for consistency, have this line and the previous formatted similarly"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "As before, shouldn't mention these as being orion options I don't think. Perhaps just enclaveKeyStoreFile etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What's the thinking here? Only logging when the test has not ended yet?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@HyukjinKwon @ueshin (cc @itholic @charlesdong1991 ) Not sure if this is the right implementation..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do we want to add any specific error on how the url is malformed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "why NOT self->lastLogIdSent_ = self->logIdToSend_"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this be in the above `if` block where we are setting the installedtimestamp to ensure this only happens for already installed (and/or adopted) clusters?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `new_tab = tabbed_browser.tabopen(background=False)`",
+      "reference": "This seems like another unrelated change I've done in `master`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the formatter in the spec.",
+      "reference": "Would be good to have another context `\"when a duplicate formatter exists for a different output target\"` that shows that it keeps both. As this stands, the specs could pass w/o the `formatter.output == new_formatter.output` check."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Why not just remove? The CUDA one has been around for while. This one has not been part of any release (?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "nit: `Contentful` is the word used in the GV API, without the uppercase in F"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "It just does the check, maybe we can name it as checkOperations."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "We no longer have karma output in the test file so these selectors were now unique and the target didn't need a child selector. Updated to force non-unique nodes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This moved from a partial to not being in a partial. How about cleaning this view up further by moving it back into a partial?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "add some form of docs in docstring or on :74 for what the effect is"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Couldn't you import `json` from `kinto.core.utils` here too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Minor: Hmmm...is it worth setting this explicitly for the tests that it affects?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))))(((((()))))))/((((())))/((((()))/((((((()))))/(((((((((((((((////////////////////",
+      "reference": "This was added to fix a race condition and you are reverting it here, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could you add some extra text here, so that it reads \"eth_coinbase function is not available, please use --private.api.addr option instead of --chaindata option\", so that it is clear that the function can work, but different options"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`new_ncr_work_order_path`? (I've been slowly moving specs over to that way of calling paths)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should flash be included in the patterns too? It currently isn't."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I suspect I will have to keep looking whether Left/Right refers to contract/Implementation while working on the rules code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "(ignore this. testing a codeflow bug)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "[Nit] can you change the Usage wording to indicate that the flag is used to opt-out of server certificate verification? (e.g. \"disables validation of the Cassandra cluster's server certificate.\")"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new dependency.",
+      "reference": "Sorry :) Would be really helpful to integrate something like Eclipse Code Formatter, so it will fail if the code style is broken (the same as eslint fails on the frontend) I use IntelliJ IDEA and their vision of imports is a bit different :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "this will still fail on systemd"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "The convention in most of the codebase is to use `if isinstance(body, bytes):` instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this would be better as: `label = comp.rsplit('.', 1)[-1]`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "We have been creating a language-level context interface for each language instead of parameterizing the generate function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Same thing about context here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "there is a function to get namespace entry from mutable state directly"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The `Transport::Config` objects don't serialize properly. We probably want to just turn them into hashes at this point."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be removed.",
+      "reference": "Sorry, typo s/unusuable/unusable/"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should create a new hive session catalog and create a new hive session catalog and create a new hive session catalog and create a new hive session catalog with the new hive session catalog.",
+      "reference": "If this is needed, should we check that the configured `uri` isn't already equal to the value of the metastore URI configured via `spark.hadoop.hive.metastore.uris` or any of the other ways of setting it. This would be a breaking change for people who have `uri` configured on the SparkSessionCatalog and have it correctly set (which I believe should be everybody as `uri` is currently required if I'm not mistaken)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return 0 if content_type and content_type.startswith(\"multipart/form-data\")",
+      "reference": "see above - this is only used to select the correct view, we don't need to handle the boundary information here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "These tests use a self-signed cert so the CA *is* the cert. I considered making a proper chain to use in the tests, but wasn't sure it was necessary to test here, since we test it in the E2E tests anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "We could, maybe, just directly do `excessDomChildren[excessDomChildren.indexOf(dom)] = null;`. Would this improve the size in any way? This will end-up with a property on the `excessDomChildren[\"-1\"]` but maybe we could live with that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a valid event)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "this looks like it may be something that needs additional refactoring"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Nit: Remove whitespace (and below)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "\"Failed opening\" or \"Failed to open\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "and -> or"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "Add a `yield User.init()` here to wait for all indexes to finish building"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this belongs here. If the application can take a local_ip as input, the application should take care of it, not in this common library"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "@DanHarrin please add a `return true` at the bottom of this method, as the docblock indicates a boolean return value."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This is used in o.a.l.sandbox.search.BM25FQuery."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this work as well for Disjoint?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a traceback.print_exc()",
+      "reference": "Same here. This was included to quiet the test for the 3D descriptors. As we removed them, this exception handling is no longer required"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a separate file, not a separate file.",
+      "reference": "Why do you need to load a specific data reader in lbann_library?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why not ValueTask?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm nervous about this line, I don't want to go regenerate a bunch of imageset jobs for clusters that are old, already installed, but don't have a CLIImage set (which they wouldn't because they're old) Adding the Installed guard is meant to address this. Otherwise this *should* recreate the imageset job due to the code in this function that deletes the job if it's finished. (but we don't have our images set due to this clause)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a table metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata metadata",
+      "reference": "Is it necessary to change this file? Doesn't `tableMetadata` call `newTableMetadata`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "I think that I have a better proposal for this test - improve it so that it would know how to read the list of SupportedProtocolVersions and dynamically use these. The motivation here is that I expect to have another network version soon, and this test seems to be a good test case for that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "What is the purpose of this debug message? I'm not sure how it would help."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Is there a corresponding BUILD dependency to prune?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The \"good\" and \"bad\" descriptions confused me a bit. Maybe `allowedContentType` and `disallowedContentType`? Not sure if that's better."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "It would be better to just change RWD to throw IllegalStateException if you attempt to execute a command after quit (unless it's a second call to quit())"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You may want to have a look at `func checkClusterFormed(t *testing.T, servers...*Server)` in this file that I created some time ago. It will timeout at 5 seconds, but will return as soon as cluster is ready."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I see a few places where this blob of code is required due to the removal of `errnum` parameter from `flux_respond` -- trading 2 lines of code for 8. The improvement to the function seems like a good idea, but I wonder if we need a convenience macro or function to do it the old way? You went through and made all the changes, was it overall a net win?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I know it's not related to your change, but it's a bit odd that this import uses a relative path rather than the ones setup by webpack. Might be nice to change this one in case we refactor those paths in the future; this one wouldn't get caught in any kind of find+replace."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Good catch, and if we don't declare the newSchedule here, will the last schedule be executed in multi goroutine?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "`project` should never be null here, unless we have projects that aren't in the solution? Which we shouldn't have"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be included in the `extractor/restriction_map.hpp` file.",
+      "reference": "Simple `for` loop instead of `for_each` would help here by making it more readable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I think it would be better to have a separate enum enum enum enumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenumenum",
+      "reference": "Looks like this falls through, should break."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Let's default manifest lists and manifests to overwrite. These use UUID-based file names and should never conflict."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to false.",
+      "reference": "Please rename [speechView] to [speechViewer]."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "I would use shorter yet still descriptive names, e.g. `KernelPerCpu` and `UserPerCpu`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should check_user_can_edit_record(user_info, recID) if check_user_can_edit_record(user_info, recID): print_record(user_info, recID)",
+      "reference": "if we are seeking for the content of only one field from metadata, no need to check whether a user could edit record or not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ExecuteCDP` method.",
+      "reference": "Should this be camelCase to match the above commands? I am not the expert here so maybe Lucas or David can chime in."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This is also missing in CreateScopeFromExecuteAsync. Can you add that there too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not change the date.",
+      "reference": "I hope that this does not break anything... Probably needs detailed beta tests."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if it's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@JonRowe in what scenario do you see this being manually set?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should check_inactive_votes_cache_election()",
+      "reference": "I think the work \"trigger\" makes more sense than \"check\" because this is taking an action based on status."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "add a configuration, default put public key in Microservice, if the configuration is set, then put in Instance."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "WDYT about the idea above of making these all verbs that correspond to the input spec?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "With the introduction of the enum(s) the constants in the store classes should be removed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I would say `!= 5`; A packet with <5 would be malformed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think you missed removing `Stateful` from `push/config.go`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "why would you make it internal? if so then at least protected internal"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We should check if the response (`d`) contains bar as response, screw the log. :smile:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "@Laurae2 good call. This is the only one I found (with `git grep transfered`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I don't understand how this work, could you explain?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "The abbreviation for \"context\" used extensively inside DR is \"cxt\", not \"ctx\", so s/MCTX/MCXT/."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "here is `:seconds` missing again"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "initializing to null makes me uncomfortable. let's have a default value"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is the `GET % HTTP/1.1` scenario right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "No need to use the fully qualified path the BackendAuth facade, just `use BackendAuth` is fine."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Because it's similar for send/open/change/receive types, then probably it can be just common `nano::epoch nano::block::epoch () const` with override for state_block (like nano::block::link (), account (), representative ())"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please give a more descriptive name and add a command to explain what it does."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "we can never get rid of this..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a new metric for this. I think we should add a new metric for this.",
+      "reference": "what is the effect of changing these buckets in existing data that is available in the monitoring system? if there are any existing dashboards that use previous histogram buckets they are probably going to be wrong ot invalid? also any reason why we chose these specific values?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This won't work. For the flag to be passed to the plugin, it should be passed as part of the --plugin argument. --plugin \"yarpc --sanitize-tchannel\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into a BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB",
+      "reference": "@shiyu1994 @StrikerRUS what do you think about this addition to `c_api.cpp`? I think it's a really useful addition to be able to get this type of information from the `Booster`, but I want more opinions since `c_api` is the main public API for the library."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "rename Round -> requestedRound and DbRound -> dbRound. we don't need to export the fields here, only the error struct."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to test cluster deployment without region label.",
+      "reference": "This expected value should probably be what you literally expect, otherwise there's a chance getClusterRegion is doing something wrong and the test wouldn't catch it because it's being run for both expected and actual."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "TODO: update unit tests to exercise base64-inline path"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean, but I don't think it should be a boolean.",
+      "reference": "this method knows too much - it is kind of a strange side effect I'd prefer if we had separate method for acknowledging that the onboarding was done and should not be shown again"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "Do we need to increase the DB version? Also, should probably be a constant, no?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if the window's every duration is zero. I don't think we should check if the window's every duration is zero. I think we should check if the window's every duration is zero.",
+      "reference": "We could utilize the new isZero method in this if-statement, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make the test blockOpsConfig in a different way? I don't think we should do this in a different way.",
+      "reference": "should probably have config have a `t` or a `logger.NewTestLogger(t)`, and return the latter"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does this not do the same thing as `copy`? I thought that `copy` just did an elementwise assignment, but maybe I was wrong."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Here we are merging the configs from proto annotations and gapic config. But in other places in this PR we are using the new enum to pick one or the other, right? Or is that not the correct way to think about this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the default port to 8080.",
+      "reference": "not related to this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/(((()))))/(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why is this needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This one could be replaced with a `std::max`, no?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Couldn't you just write this as an if/else or a guard clause like on line 87? Just seems a bit weird doing this conditional assignment for essentially an if/else."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean. I don't think that's a good idea, but I think it should be a boolean.",
+      "reference": "Please use strict type comparisons (`===`), not loose type comparisons."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The filter parameters are a bit confusing. I understand that one of them has to be set, but what takes precedence if a from/to is set and the hash as well? Should that fail?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Is that necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "yess so much easier to read in order like this!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "question: would this convention automatically and always apply to all classes derived from `LuceneTestCase` including any non-`org.apache` name spaces or would it be possible to opt-out (without an exclusion list) somehow for custom code that might perhaps have chosen a different convention?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Also found this bug, where we were setting the min passcode length to 6, but the min length for a connected app is 4. This can cause problems when the app is force closed or the shared pref is removed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why was this change necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "I kind of did this deliberately, so everything from the distributor appears in the same set of logs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We already have a `seq = pkt[TCP].seq` so you can just re-use it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "We avoid wildcard imports because it isn't clear where symbols are coming from and there is potential for collision. Could you roll back this change? (As well as the additional newline, we don't use breaks in imports either.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Why are these variables renamed? Is there a conflict with some Windows specific variable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Do you test for file existence simply to reduce the warning message that may occur using the include? Also - I think the practice used in BOINC is to go ahead and use include_once even though it isn't strictly necessary in this case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to this table. I don't think we should add a column to this table.",
+      "reference": "`TimeChaos` does not contains a field.spec.action"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "You need to override where possible in rs-api"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add AdditionalData here.",
+      "reference": "Should this have an add/update/etc pattern? What happens if I need to change some set of data? May be better to just let the callsite manipulate the dictionary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `getAlgorithmInstance` or `getAlgorithmInstance`",
+      "reference": "I don't think this should be added to PyRegion. Adding it here requires that every region have an \"algorithm\" which may not always make sense and the return value type will be different in every case. But fine to use the same name in the regions where we choose to implement it as a convention if that makes the API more discoverable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Returning here bypasses all the health check and load balancing features."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file should be renamed to \"License\".",
+      "reference": "Should revert this copyright change, when the file isn't changing in any other way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Interesting that filepath.Dir(\"thing\") returns \".\" whereas this returns \"\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Nice, I did not know about that"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.hip_impl.h",
+      "reference": "Since the lock is have moved outside of this function, I think it would be simpler and efficient to just return a ref to the std::vector? That way, we don't need to make a new copy on read and we won't actually need a write operation."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "also fetch block hash of this height and return hash"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class. I don't think we should move this to the `HttpMessageHandler` class.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need this in this sample app and not the others?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We don't need this additional method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this return code conditionally? The above line seems like an error occurred."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "What is the need to use string as key? Can we use the apis type as the key?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "how about a default parameter instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "i don't think we need to add duplicate check for clusterinstallref here, the function already assumes that it was invoked for clusterprovision"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "\\`bbox_feats.shape[0] > 0\\` requires the number of proposal is not 0."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Same here. Any way to fit on one line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "using folly::to is better?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'm guessing this is unintended?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This looks a little suspicious to me, can you explain what's going on here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can you talk about this? I'm not sure I follow why this is necessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there really a need for this'simple' layout? Is there a reason you can't use 'lightbox'? The only difference seems to be that the lightbox layout includes Piwik/Google Analytics tracking and simple does not. If tracking needs to be disabled for some reason, perhaps there is a way to do that without creating a whole new layout."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `MergePolicy#getMergingSegments()` or `MergePolicy#getMergingSegments()`",
+      "reference": "Can you say what exception will be thrown in that case (or add an `@throws`, below)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "Is this meant to be \"2.7\" or \"2.6\". The two lines in this commit don't agree with one another. Looks like everything else in this PR is \"2.6\" and that seems sensible."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Should we put these tests in a `generators` directory?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think that it makes more sense to keep these with the standard definition of non-zero is true and zero is false."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Any idea why you want to change the behavior here? Is there a security risk not to have the prefix in the principal here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "this reads like \"mock database cache\", maybe a clearer name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Nit: move this with the other CM imports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This change should be mentioned in the CM"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `SpanCreationSettings.Parent` instead of a `SpanCreationSettings.Parent`",
+      "reference": "Do we really want a new type, or can we just use `SpanContext`? The `ISpanContext` interface is read-only, but there's nothing stopping users from casting this to `SpanContext` and modifying it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Should we define a const like NETFRAMEWORK or NETFULL which will be set for NET452 NET461 and anything like NET47 etc in future?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i( i i i",
+      "reference": "maybe start an issue to capture params that we need final values for and link to it here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can we instead do the check in find_instance_group_by_url()? if we return None when group is not found, it will hit the next if statement (if not instance_group) and continue as expected, in this case we don't need to add 3 separate if statements"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "on my android \".a.m\" and \".p.m\" is used add `||` here to support both variants"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "`!FormatIsMultiplane(image_format)` will always be true at this point due to the test on line 4639."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Maybe inline the CachedAccessor code? Is it similar to our lazy property? If yes, can we reconcile the two?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Nit this file has unintended changes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Potential NPE? `hasMedia && selectedItem...`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `create_volume` or `create_volume`",
+      "reference": "PEP-8/consistency with the rest of the code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `MongoDbClientAssembly` class.",
+      "reference": "nit: Would you mind moving the `ParameterTypeNames` assignment into each of the method-specific attributes? That could reduce confusion if we later decided to instrument other methods in MongoDb"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))2))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Is exposing SpecProvider needed here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "So this will only be executed when it is true. I'm not sure that makes it always usable. Why not make the afterAction, `Action` and always call it, with the result as parameter."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Tim, please add { } to this 'if'."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Suggest moving to `enable.go` since thats only place used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This changed when I rebuilt my docker container. Not quite sure why, but might have to do with what my host network configuration looks like when it's rebuilt."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Local cache of what? What's stored in it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "If the copied `DataFile` returns null, shouldn't the copy also return null? Why not make the builder use `Integer` instead of a primitive here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "You could just do this test in the `save_html` function above, and then the users of the save html function don't have to worry about it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the error message here.",
+      "reference": "I think I'd prefer not using the formatted string when it comes to unit test, since we don't pass in any string variable as params."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Maybe it would be better to explicitly include devices instead of explicitly excluding devices?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This could be `for (auto bond: bonds()){`, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "use $this->getConfig() instead of $this->getConfig()",
+      "reference": "Is $config no longer being used? Can we remove this line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))())))))))))))(())))((())))((()))((()((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "can you revert changes to this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a",
+      "reference": "I don't believe the change is sufficient to correctly handle variable substitutions in the name. As part of the process command we pass the original role object that was retreived without taking into account the substitution. So while the first template apply command will work fine because the original role does not exist thus it's a new add operation, if you try to re-apply the same template again, we'll pick up and process a wrong original name thus we'll try to execute an add operation again instead of modify. So we need to take into account the substituted name when we retrieve the original role as well. Same change should be applied to both policy and service blocks as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "IsOnMainThread { get; }",
+      "reference": "Please add this to IMvxMainThreadDispatcher as well"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is it possible for opt not to be a string? I couldn't tell if this was a typo or if there is actually a case where it is not a string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `UserInputSettings`.",
+      "reference": "Let's move this up next to the `id` as we usually have `className` as one of the first props."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "While you're in here, \"build, push and install\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Unit never made it to spec...so removing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ServiceLatency` struct.",
+      "reference": "We have RequestStart which seems redundant a bit to this one, WDYT?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "I think we can remove this corresponding export from `preact` now! Double check no other s using though lol"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new column to the table.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure why this would be in here. Were you working off a branch based off of master? These lines were removed in a previous commit because the table is actually called 'cart_item_traits'."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Maybe `DEFAULT_GITHUB_API_ENDPOINT` would be a better name, since we refer to this as an API endpoint elsewhere?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "If/when you rebase from `dev`, this is going to cause a merge conflict. I'd suggest that soon after merging this PR as the capabilities code has been moved to \"agent/app/agent_capabilities.go\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to test this, but I don't think we should test this.",
+      "reference": "What is the test case here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to wait for cache sync.",
+      "reference": "You could try moving this closer to the call, where we request label info. We might be doing the check very early.. all the resources may not be present with the informer at this point."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Can we add these up by the data files counts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))) # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #",
+      "reference": "Most of the time assigning won't save bytes unless used 3+ times (var adds 3bytes)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "I would rather find the code that inverts the logic and remove that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The else doesn't return anything?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "assignments should only be cuddled with other assignments (from `wsl`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "why not simply `paths = search_path_opts.LibrarySearchPaths`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Are we sure this should be translated by the web client? It was unclear in chat exactly what's getting translated here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "same oneof issue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "If we resolve here, isn't the whole `module_install` config setting or any subkeys also pluggable? I think that's totally fine, just want to make sure that that's known, and we should also update the data in `options.rb` for those options"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be free()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()",
+      "reference": "it would be better to change `kds` into a `std::vector` then we don't need to explicitly free it"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Looks like you're also changing logic and not only tests."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Is it possible that test failures here are real and that we should improve the rate limiting logic? Or are we ok with rate limits to be exceeded by 15%?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't there be some kind of validation somewhere? IMO there should be an exception if `$options['lazy']` is not a boolean."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "nit: please move it inside namespace."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The inventory schema needs to be regenerated to include these options. Looks like the CI job didn't get triggered since the paths don't include `lib/bolt/transport/**`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do that.",
+      "reference": "This might break if a user runs the system tests with a system language other than English, in which the user default language differs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "This was raising intermittent errors, since Lorem ipsum contains the word \"error\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't we then add `mp_impl = nullptr` to the destructor of `RTPSParticipant`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this patch is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Are the additional brackets necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "consumerMeta only belongs to this invoker instance only relate to this one consumerIntf class seems no need to build a complex key?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "this one is unrelated right? (Don't mind including it, just making sure I understand)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the base_schedule.py file.",
+      "reference": "8, 11 actually achieves similar performance, we should use our default config if [9,11] is unnecessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "For a separate PR: Can we make this a JSON/Thrift procedure instead? It could accept the amount of time it needs to sleep as an argument."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.",
+      "reference": "Please remove this blank line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "the cartTrait is not used anymore"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new method to this class.",
+      "reference": "Cn you please make the message more human friendly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please do `import enum` instead, then use `enum.Enum` and `enum.unique` - we do this everywhere to see where things are coming from, except for Qt (everything begins with a `Q` anyways) and typing (mostly used in type annotations, so it's clear without the namespacing)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid instruction, but I don't think it's a valid instruction.",
+      "reference": "Isn't ENCFAIL used in codec.c below? Wouldn't this make it no longer compile?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "this looks very weird"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This class will be complety removed in 7.0.0",
+      "reference": "So, the culprit was actually this class \"ConsoleLogHandler\", correct? Because it simply wrote to stdout..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "Still curious why you need to modify this method? Why not in the future just have a method called `LogFactory.ReloadConfiguration()` instead of the config assigning itself?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.",
+      "reference": "Should this say \"lint, cleanup, destroy, dependency, syntax, create, prepare, converge, idempotence, side_effect, verify, cleanup, destroy\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I am not sure why these log messages are changed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This panic is incorrect - this is a full implementation of a slice equality check. This should be something more like `type x is not comparable` maybe?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "See below: let's use the existing convention _tcsnlen."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.",
+      "reference": "Why don't we need this any more?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "clean unnecessary comma"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is the default value for enumerable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Just above, you have `const auto` for a `RDKit::MOL_SPTR_VECT::const_iterator`, here it is only `auto`. Why is this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))",
+      "reference": "@djarek just a quick question, wouldn't be `ptr.reset()` here better as it does not memory leak if we do not call delete on the raw pointer aswell? it maybe makes sense to use `ptr.release` if the event is guaranteed to be loaded again but on a reload it would memory leak if for example I removed that script from my files before reloading or not?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why to `Get()` value twice, while u have it 2 lines before"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `plugin.install` and `plugin.remove` commands.",
+      "reference": "There is a typo here, this needs to state `october.fresh`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a test for this?",
+      "reference": "Metadata tables loaded through `HadoopTables` will have their names as location.type (which is weird as we normally use location#type). I am not sure whether it is a big deal or not."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Can you explain why you went from a positive value (metrics.viewTop) to a negative value?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `@Path(\"/topic-names\")`",
+      "reference": "Let's use a dedicated DTO instead of `List` to remain consistent with all other existing REST API endpoints: * Introduce a new DTO class (e. g. `ExternalTaskTopicNameDto`) located under `org.camunda.bpm.engine.rest.dto.externaltask` * The class should have the attribute `topicName` of type `String` * Introduce a getter & setter for the attribute * Convert the list of strings to a list of `ExternalTaskTopicNameDto`s * Change the method signature to return `List`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this method is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Do you plan to remove the `ScriptDTO getScript(List path);` method long-term?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a valid type?",
+      "reference": "@itsiprikshit I used a custom v-model to app count component because the sourceapps component was not reacting to user app count selection, e.g. whenever user changed app count selection, the source apps selection multiplicity remained the same. As a matter of fact, user was able to select one application only. Please let me know if you have any thoughts on this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Similarly, we think we may keep `fused_semantic_head.py` unchanged. Then, we could add a new mask head for the desired function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why implement this? It duplicates the value in FeatureConfig."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `SparkBatchStreamScan` class.",
+      "reference": "@aokolnychyi / @RussellSpitzer / @holdenk Spark3 gives ScanBuilder - abstraction - to define all types of Scans (Batch, MicroBatch & Continuous). But, the current implementation / class modelling - has SparkBatchScan as the Scan implementation. Looking at some of the concerns of BatchScan - all the way from the State maintenance of a single SnapshotId to read from, the asOfTimeStamp & features like VectorizedReads - all of these don't seem relevant to Streaming Scans. So, I feel that we need to divide out Streaming Scans into a different class. Does this thought process - make sense? If we go by this route - do you folks know - how to pass different Scan objects to Spark based on Batch vs Streaming?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Will you please update these files to use a copyright end date of 2021?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `testUtils` so that we don't have to worry about it.",
+      "reference": "Adding fixture to the body as we don't have the `runner.tmpl` anymore"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `libgocontroller` file.",
+      "reference": "nit: just for consistency we can move this import block down. Right above openshift/hive imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a tuple.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps clean up the commit history and don't squash?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Just `writeBytes(content.array())` Back to my original, somewhat broken version ;)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test. I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "I couldn't tell from reading the test - do we every criss-cross transports in the same test? I want to make sure we aren't breaking the chain..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "do we want to still validate that the context had a nonzero TTL? i suppose it's fine to let clients determine whether or not their streams will timeout (though we still don't have the means to cancel them from the server other than EOF), and they can still cancel their own contexts - so maybe not a huge deal, but thought it was worth bringing up."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Go ahead and provide the same implementation for all of the languages - I'm not sure there's a reason for it to be different."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should also test type confusion here (e.g. `{\"anticache\": \"foo\"}`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'd love to trim the content of `unformatted` too. Any ideas?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is mostly focused on python3. This is mostly focused on python3.",
+      "reference": "can you remove this unrelated change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Would using `HintLabel` here instead (without `setObjectName`) work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "From what I can tell, the `serviceAccountFile` is never set to anything except \"\"? It'd be best to remove this altogether, so we don't mislead future developers"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the `sign_in_path` here.",
+      "reference": "Why do we remove the Sign in link?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "holy crap, were we really missing a 'break' statement here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This doesn't seem to be used anywhere, probably doesn't need to be a new interface."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is a good start, but what do you think about just using `libkbfs.GetCurrentSessionIfPossible()` to avoid calling this altogether if there's no session? That way we can avoid continuous RTTs to the server when logged out."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": "This `aria-labelledby` stuff is all new to me, but my reading of the spec is that the value should be a list of element id values, and `dLabel` doesn't seem to be the id of any element?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does this fail validation if you now use the `upload` key instead of `source`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is a bug, but I'm not sure if this is a bug or if it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Can we use GetCliGlobals(false)->exCollHeap() here instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I suggest you move the waitUntilAllElected into init::KV() method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "no need of pub;lic."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "Do you think we can name this variable in a less...negative.. language? maybe `ProposalTieBreakerEqualizer`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((((((((((((((((((((( code code code code code code code",
+      "reference": "Can you add back these newlines? We try to avoid non-functional changes like this because they can cause commit conflicts."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not just `if (!searches.includes(action.search)) searches.push(action.search)`? That way you don't need to remove then add the element."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@demiankatz I'm not sure that this is very useful. I just did it to get started. If we had a small handful of predetermined prefixes that were randomly chosen, it would be easier to distinguish them from the rest of the call number. Would that be preferable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why is this deleted too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Given that IApiResponse is already made disposable, this is not necessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "client.getSelectedSpellName() can be used for this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Please alpha sort these filenames."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "is this already called by actPool.validate()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to updateStereoBonds()",
+      "reference": "It is relatively cheap to tell whether a bond is a ring bond, we don't have to perform an SSSR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a flag.",
+      "reference": "Maybe we should add flag aliases for service as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This LGTM but don't we need a winning PoSts field to fully implement the protocol? No need to add here as I'm working on this in another PR, but curious how we can interop with lotus blocks without post proofs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "can you move the [] into pubSub? so Blockchain just contains a pubSub, not []"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "useCircuitBreakerThresholdPctPctPctPctPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTPCTP",
+      "reference": "I don't think 100 is a safe default here, since later we check that the value is between 50-95."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I would be nice if we could describe this without the word \"agnostic\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "Pick more specific exception types for these cases. Not sure what would be best for this one (`ValueError`?) but the next one could be `IndexError`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "This seemed like the easiest solution We need to include this path in `testMatch` to run the test AFAIK *BUT* we don't want this test ran when running them all normally I'm sure there are other ways to do this!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Most of the following test changes can be avoided if need be."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Eventually we might want to move this back as generating this data structure takes some time (for large datasets) and we don't want it in the hot-path of `osrm-customize` runs. Thinking long-term making `osrm-customize` eventually digest `.osrm.cells` will will enable only updating cells selectively and using an earlier customization for the rest."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You're not really using named result variable - you can just leave `error`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "It wasn't possible to call this method with `PartitionSpec.unpartitioned()` as the schema in the spec was empty."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "this namespace is never used"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Well, if you call `Nack`, it _will_ be redelivered. So maybe reword."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why did we make this a static string?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the asset type here.",
+      "reference": "Please re-run PYTHONPATH=. python tests/services/inventory/update_cai_dumps.py following the instructions at the top of this file to ensure the test files have the correct CAI asset type."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "`stateDB := NewStateDBAdapter(sm, 0, hash.ZeroHash256, NotFixTopicCopyBugOption())`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "There are unneeded parens here, but I'll fix it up when merging."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Just one more thing... How about doing all of the following? 1. renaming h2o.rb to bootstrap.rb 2. require and include the acl code _from_ bootstrap.rb"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/((()))))/(((()))))))/(((((((((",
+      "reference": "Commit message: \"remove\" is misspelled."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This is a pretty idiosyncratic method - I'd move it into the JSON-RPC package rather than adding it to `BytesValue`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Is there a way to deduplicate this somehow? Could we roll it into `RSpec.configuration` with a bit of memoization or is there a chicken and egg problem."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to \"updateNotInProgress\"",
+      "reference": "Generally, I wouldn't say I like the idea of providing properties that return negative/inverted values. It would be more convenient to return whether the update is **in** progress or not."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Converting playbackManager to operate in ms (preferred solution, imo) would allow us to completely drop this function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "The default value should be a bigger one, I'd like it is the maximum of int32. That means we will not cut-off anything by default. And users would config it with an appropriate value in config-file, such as 1000 or 5000, etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Probably missing return here as well"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "On second thought... this affects how often the function specified by the `load` property is run. So I wonder if, for consistency, we should call this `LoadInterval` instead. Does that make sense?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Now you don't need the localization module here then :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should not convert each value to a literal on every invocation. Instead, this PR can add a `literals` method to `BoundSetPredicate` to access the values as literals. That way, the conversion happens once and can be lazy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `None`, not `None`.",
+      "reference": "I think we still need this exception if doesn't have LIGHTGBM_BUILD_DOC"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Does this make it easier to read? Previously this would have run `kubectl describe certificate` right? In which case it would have included events related to the cert. Will we miss that? Would the old `kubectl describe` output have gone to stderr?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Just an understanding question: do we need a map here, would a list/set of Strings be sufficient? we are not adding entries with `false` here, are we? Being in the list already means it's used, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this check.",
+      "reference": "Ah, so the change is that you want the `prune()` side effect before doing the `task.id not in necessary_tasks` membership check? Stupid non-Haskell programming languages :p"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This change was not really intended but made by the linter of VS Code. And looking at other packages this looks like a best practise to place interal packages on the top and gh imports afterwards."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Do we normally force ReadPreference primary on other write operations? Or is it just that we normally ignore it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Transform` class. I don't think that's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Instead of returning null here and discarding nulls automatically, I think this should return null (or some other signaling value) and fix the part that consumes the output of the visitor."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to update VoteTallyCache if prevBlockHeader is not present.",
+      "reference": "Really, we want to be setting the validatorsForPreviousBlock against the yet to be created block, so it might make sense to update the cache once the block is created/imported instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option option",
+      "reference": "It seems to me that the original implementation was correct. Can you share what the scanner was pointing out?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the webpack.config.js file.",
+      "reference": "Instead of doing that, please create an `assets/js/googlesitekit-subscribe-with-google-bulk-edit.js` file as entry point - all our entry points should be located in `assets/js`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `span`",
+      "reference": "This is not valid, a `div` shouldn't be in a `span`. You could apply the `className` attribute to the `span` tag."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),",
+      "reference": "Would it be possible to reuse RcJobExpireDuration and RcJobExpireInterval and auto delete them when job is deleted?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Python wants **future** imports to come first."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `detach_on_permanent_stack` function.",
+      "reference": "Better to call this before EXITING_DR which is supposed to be last."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to recreate the HomeFragment when Home is pressed.",
+      "reference": "Does this work at runtime?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Hmm why do we need to make this change? Like which one requires this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "why remove this and other piece?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Yikes... That was probably me."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "It would be better to move the... outside of the l8n block. This way it won't need to be translated for each language twice."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "That's a huge load of new dependencies. I think it's better to create a reload function on ScriptManager and control with enum instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `NewUpgradeTaskJob()` method.",
+      "reference": "`NewUpgradeTaskJob` -> `NewUpgradeResource`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is that the memory usage of the system or the process / awesome?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "\"change\" *and* \"schema\" events (A bunch of these; not marking them all)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it would be better to create a new one with the new sequence number and the new one with the new sequence number. I think it would be better to create a new one with the new sequence number and the new one with the new sequence number.",
+      "reference": "I think there is probably a shorter, more descriptive name for this. Something like `commitAtSequenceNumber`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this to `url_name`",
+      "reference": "The `url_name` should definitely be more than just 1 character long at the shortest. How about 3 or 4 characters?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Please revert this change"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Nice. I hadn't even heard of presenters in Rails before (learn something new every day) :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`string[]`? not sure, can you verify this @core23? Thank you"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((()))))",
+      "reference": "are we aware that this breaks older browsers like WebOS? :) they don't handle `let`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We can't use touch here because we need to update the TTL value in the object. We can't use touch here because we need to update the TTL value in the object.",
+      "reference": "This isn't really a Kinto record but a Memcached record. I could kind of go either way on this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))((()))(((((((((RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR",
+      "reference": "Kick off the download after login."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I don't think you need to change this, `array` should be accepted whenever `string[]` is expected. (`string[]` is an alias of `array` itself an alias of `array` which is a parent type of `array`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "TODO: fix this, probably in another PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not start hinting.",
+      "reference": "Is there any case that tab is None?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "pls use `err` instead of `e`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "`attachGamepadScript` above can also be placed inside."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "when we use RegisterWriteCommand,this func should be exported,so we can use this to get signer at the outside action package"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "Dead code - we should remove it or use `log.Trace` for lower logging level. Same applies for change at line 138."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "How does this make sure invalid coordinates making the parser fail? Relying on the Coordinate type's boost numeric_cast calls in the ctor? Shouldn't we rely on a coordinate's `.IsValid()` member function instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `CACHE_ENABLED` or `CACHE_ENABLED`",
+      "reference": "Does this line (and the corresponding one in the test bootstrap) actually do anything? I don't see where CACHE_ENABLED is used as a global constant."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "has this changed? are we testing \"all possible situations\" now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option. I don't think it's a good option.",
+      "reference": "ZK is properly spelled 'ZooKeeper' (capital 'K')."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Guessing this locates the key you get when you run `gcloud auth application-default login`? What was the previous behavior/the behavior for the manual Veneer creds?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "looks good to me, but it would be better if you assigned `this.countRows()` into a variable, so it doesn't trigger twice in the return statement"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "For now, don't add \"use strict\" to any existing files. That's a separate project that we'll do later. (New files can use \"use strict\".)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `errorcheck` instead of a `errorcheck`.",
+      "reference": "I was confused by this env name variable, assuming it was the value, not the name. Silly nit, but maybe name it noninteractiveEnv?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`sys.platform` could be equal to `darwin` which is posix. Use `not startswith('win')`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `NewOverrideLookup` method. I don't think we should add this to the `NewOverrideLookup` method, but I don't think that's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "let's move this into `slack_helper.go`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "I doubt it will work, but without space between -o and ControlPath it should. Lets see. What I do not understand is why we did not see a failure on CI related to this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "this is the reason we might be seeing 360 as discrete bearing"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`FULL_VERSION` is available at module level for others to use, but it won't have `%(prog)s` substituted with pylint. Will that be a problem. Also put it here instead of __pkginfo__ with other versions because it isn't pkginfo related."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Is this needed? I don't see any uses."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this be V1beta1?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think there's an `approval_for`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this interface is needed.",
+      "reference": "Here we should use List in generic"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The `JavaCompile#getToolChain` method got removed and I am not sure what a good replacement is. I replaced it with `targetCompat` for now but they are not equivalent. Maybe we can use `JavaVersion#current` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "The method name is incorrect. It does not check the existence of the file. I'd suggest deprecating both methods `fileExists` and `findIdByHash` and use findIdByFilename instead of fileExits"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We have `stdbool` imported, might as well use that for clarity."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "File is empty, consider removing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "`writeConcernMax` was changed to return a `writeConcern` formatted the new way-- `writeConcern: {w:1,...}`. Bulk execute takes an actual `WriteConcern` object as its first parameter (this was changed in master), so we have to un-wrap the `writeConcernMax` result here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "How about passing this through the `config`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Out of curiosity - did we make this change to allow dynamically assigning a value to `os.environ[\"TEST_TARGET\"]` during test execution? I kind of liked the decorator style `@only_localstack` - makes the condition a bit more explicit. Looks like `skipif` also allows to specify a condition string, e.g. `pytest.mark.skipif('os.environ.get(\"TEST_TARGET\") == \"AWS_CLOUD\"')` - could that be an option? (not sure if that gets lazily evaluated at runtime right before the execution of the annotated test method starts, though..)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `$this->domainId = $sliderItemData->domainId;` or `$this->domainId = $sliderItemData->domainId;`",
+      "reference": "I noticed (SonarCloud noticed actually) that the implementation of `::edit` method is the same as `__construct` is. Does it make sense to call the `edit` method from the constructor?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `flb_debug(\"[syslog-prot] incomplete message!\")`",
+      "reference": "would you please rename the message prefix to: [in_syslog]...\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" ( \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "The pointer to a pointer is kind of gross. How about either taking the `ROMOL_SPTR` directly or, preferably, returning an `std::pair`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "the name confusing, please rename to `pendingCountNoLock` or similar"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "line is 175 characters"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this check.",
+      "reference": "@ivanbogdanov Does this fix the first time load gray screen issue that @wmathurin noticed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this warning.",
+      "reference": "Is `2.3.0` version OK?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I tested it only in Firefox (`./go //rb:firefox-test`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the test client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client client",
+      "reference": "separate third party and builtin"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "@smcnulty-sfdc We do want to finish the hybrid activity in our hybrid apps though. Could the caller not pass in `frontActivity` instead? Or start it up again post-logout?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "isn't this going to return a timeout error if the context is canceled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`argNameVal.length` will still be!=2, so line 22 will give true and then continue on line 24"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `if ($chars[$i] === '\\\\' || preg_match('/\\w/', $char)) {` instead of `if ($chars[$i] === '\\\\' || preg_match('/\\w/', $char)) {`",
+      "reference": "It was `$chars[$i]` I believe."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This has the likely potential to break existing tests that are relying on the old beaker behavior. If we are going to release this in beaker 3.x, then we need to preserve the old behavior as well (so set both the `upcase` and original values). On Windows, they env variables will overwrite each other, with the same value, so not an issue. On *nix, there will be two env variables, but they will have the same value, so again no issue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this?",
+      "reference": "Thanks for fixing this! I probably didn't test the playground when making changes here for cloud variables."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "I will also check if `nameMapping` needs a precondition null check."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Since RuntimeIOException is deprecated and you are touching this code, why not replace it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception, but I don't think it should be an exception.",
+      "reference": "You should also have a test that calls it with tm_cpp and make sure it returns the correct JSON file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "One more minor change, the string `ForAdditionalLiveTvOptions` is probably also unused."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))) 2)))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "How to distinguish between warning and error?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be done in the UIAHandler class.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps you want to check if UIAHandler.handler is not None. The current check will break NVDA if you call UIAHandler.terminate() for some reason."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be set to true.",
+      "reference": "can we make `replace-partitions` property a static variable in `SnaphotSummary.java`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe call it `WireBridge`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the `activate_user` function.",
+      "reference": "Should really be `one()`, not `one_or_none()`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we use strings.Split and strings.Join instead of manual concatenation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `input_definition` class.",
+      "reference": "rough that this needs to exist, but it is what it is"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "FYI, I pulled your branch and hacked a little on your test case. This passes for me (you may want to tweak further): 
     it('should not set empty string for null props in custom elements', () => { customElements.define('x-bar', class extends HTMLElement { val; }); // @ts-ignore render(<x-bar val={null} />, scratch); expect(scratch.childNodes).to.have.length(1); expect(scratch.firstChild).to.have.property('nodeName', 'X-BAR'); expect(scratch.firstChild.attributes.length).to.equal(0); expect(scratch.firstChild.val).to.equal(null); }); 
    "
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "It is the maximum value that the configured emulator can support."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "how to do this?",
+      "reference": "Here, I've been giving priority to the session saved by the user. This means, that if the user quits with `:wq`, then restarts `qutebrowser`, and then `qutebrowser` crashes for some reason, next time `qutebrowser` is restarted, the session saved lastly with `wq` will be restored, and not the one autosaved. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this line got me confused for few seconds, as the `AccountData` is both the name of the data structure as well as the function name. I think that `GetAccountData` is a better choice for a name. ( note that the same applies for the previous `BalanceRecord` function name )"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I think this mutex is only used here. Remove it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate method.",
+      "reference": "so this is now init to 1?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "For future note; not prefixing the table in a join can throw an error in the query parser depending on how the query is built I am making an assumption this was tested"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Had to bring this up, will abandon this style of testing based on Joel's work soon."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What does our source validation complain about here? Many of the logok/nowarn places look fine to me at a glance but I'm no match for the logging policeman ;-)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It feels like this dependency should not be here. Some deep internal openvpn package (middleware) knows about one of possible stats consumers. Maybe as an alternative, statistics and state callbacks can be extracted as separate interfaces in top openvpn package and reused by both sides"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ( ()))) ( ()) ( ())) ( ()) ( ( ())) ( ( ()) ( ( ()) ( ( ( () ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #",
+      "reference": "Can you please remove `codec` from the parameters too? I think it's unused now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "mocks needed this change so that it returns the \"right\" thing"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do, I don't think it's a good thing to do, but I think it's a good thing to do. I don't think it's a good thing to do, but I think it's a good thing to do. I think it's a good thing to do.",
+      "reference": "I don't think the getters for this are needed, but looks good other than that"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": ":+1: to inlining this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Does psalm support the same logic internally for object-like arrays? Just want to be certain I can indicate this is a contextual return item `crypto?:mixed`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "I can't recall if there was a fix specific to this in the past?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `SecretKeySelector`.",
+      "reference": "Not sure what the todo is here? Is it to support some kind of defaulting based off of that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Not sure about this name. I think \"explicit\" is also a bit difficult here (I think it should be implicit then) Proposal: FlushOnEvents. Or, It would be cool if we could split into 2 options, FlushOnShutdown and FlushOnReload, but I expect that's far more difficult to implement?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think that works - you can't mark a fixture."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to use `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` instead of `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE'] : '~')` and `Bolt::Util.windows?? ENV['USERPROFILE']",
+      "reference": "We should not include this path."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "Add newline at end of file"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table. I think it would be better to add a column to the table and add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "This should be done when updating to the next release (2.5). You currently only perform the upgrade when users go from 1.4 to 1.5, so it will lead to crashes for existing users."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `hive.openshift.io/clusterName` file.",
+      "reference": "suggest hive.openshift.io/cluster-machine-management or something to make it more obvious what it is."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "We explicitly don't want to do that. This was a complaint from users before."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new method to this class.",
+      "reference": "Hello, The PHPDoc is `string[]` not `int[]`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Same issues with parameters order in `ipset_server.go`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Wow, did it literally mean the retention days is a huge number?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "you probably didn't intend to touch those files in `scripts/`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Similar to `collate_fn`, we may rename it to `tpfp_fn`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to return this.",
+      "reference": "Awesome! We may also use negative rule `never` to fix new lines after `return`: `{ blankLine: \"never\", prev: \"return\", next: \"*\" }`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why can't this be a function on the `Config` interface like all the others?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "If the feed is null, the menu items should still be setup. Just the feed title can be left out. That prevents possible flickering when menu items are displayed/hidden for some feeds."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure that this should call `allowIncompatibleChanges()` because adding a required column when there are no existing values will break reading the new column in any table with data in it. The only time it is safe to add a required column is if there is no data in the table. What about throwing an exception here instead? I agree that the column should not be optional if NOT NULL was specified. Another alternative is to check whether the table has data and allow the incompatible change if it doesn't have any rows."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the label here.",
+      "reference": "Early translation, should be logic-less"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I don't understand why these functions return a request/response, respectively. In all implementations we actually _modify_ the request/response given as a parameter. Do you envisage situations where we'd want to construct completely fresh request/response objects? Even if we do, it's not something needed atm, so I'd favour in keeping the API minimal. Also, the fact that these functions _may_ mutate the request/response should be noted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Wasn't there a subsequent reason why we had to keep the `/p/project_graph` route? Outside references or is the proposed solution to the original proposal we us `/p/g` as the `compares#project_graph` route?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "Any suggestions on how I would even _approach_ writing tests for arbitrary values...."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `active_key`.",
+      "reference": "Scope declarations for class constants was not added until 7.1, this will not be accepted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)));)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "The assertion here is that find should never return end() because this is the only mechanism that reaps items from the activeClientMap. If it == end something went horribly wrong."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error if the key doesn't have one.",
+      "reference": "The `unless the collection...` part reads a little bit hard, maybe separate into its own sentence and explain what it means by `cannot generate a fresh key`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `FailedPrecondition` or `FailedPrecondition`?",
+      "reference": "Doesn't `gcerr_string.go` need to be updated for this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Both cases allowed by the Go spec are now supported, so it's a bug in the compiler if we get here. You can replace the `todo:` error with a panic. (Note: getting here would be a bug because when we get to SSA level the code has long been type checked and has already been verified as being valid Go)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the history_prepared_history()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()())()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()",
+      "reference": "You can simply do `if tab.history_prepared:` here as empty lists are falsey."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Remove this whitespace"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "`show_img` is not normalized while `one_img` is normalized. And line 139 pass `show_img` for pytorch2onnx function. Is this expected behavior?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why is this bounded between -30 and 30?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I think even you can exclude to run it on nvcc"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "G104: Errors unhandled. (from `gosec`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "will `failure` always include `arn` and `reason` in its dictionary? If so, :+1:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should this be optional, or default to 'action' as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "how about formating this import?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Comma police. :) Also, the docstring needs updating."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Implement an in-memory implementation of this in the fake driver."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Same question as the other view spec regarding not actually saving records."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Rethrow for `MustBeRethrown()`-exceptions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "May clean the unnecessary modification."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Should this line set the value to `x` since that is checked below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I don't particularly love the terminology here. Why not simply add `copy(boolean stats)` or a copy with an enum to indicate what portions of the datafile to include? At some point we may want just some of the values (e.g. CBO may want counts, but not lower/upper bounds). Just a thought."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "you could probably remove keyValue and just compare idx vs ann.length (ex I think the goal here is to ensure it works with a value like `foo=`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "we do this to differentiate between the multiple cc files for when the recording is stopped / restarted multiple times within a single meeting"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `Lost--Library Applied`",
+      "reference": "You've deleted this code but not added it anywhere else. Should this be used as my proposed example in the.ini file? Do we need a mechanism for configuring a global fallback string independent of the numeric codes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "nit: strip away those imports? seems not used in the new code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this in the future.",
+      "reference": "redundant whitespace :octocat:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test. I don't think it's a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "I don't believe that the `assertDictEqual` call can pass without `api_response` being a `dict`, so this second check isn't needed!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Fuzzer did not like this change. Looks like I misunderstood how the pool works... if allocated from a pool we should never free it manually, right? I think I'll need to drop this patch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line.",
+      "reference": "Wouldn't it make sense to already have title, owner etc in this class?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.",
+      "reference": "New generators should have version `next`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable? I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Wrap these two lines inside an `if (node.isMetricsEnabled() || metricsConfiguration.isPushEnabled()) {... }`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "if end_level == -1 or end_level == (self.num_ins - 1): for end_level is the Index of the end input backbone level."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "No CLR overhead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Consider faking the TestClient's GetProject/GetZone/GetMachine methods."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Returning a private type as part of the public API? Isn't this impossible for users to implement?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "prefer common_properties::_canonicalRankingNumber if possible, should be quicker in general."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a change. I don't think it should be a change.",
+      "reference": "The meaning of `loss_normalizer` and `loss_normalizer_momentum` should be reflected in docstring."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(()))((()))",
+      "reference": "Call to `cloexec_pipe` (or an equivalent function) is missing. I presume that this is the reason why you are seeing timeout errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "There are no changes in this file. Please reset."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is the Q-function: the normal distribution specified by the mean, this is the probability of getting samples further the mean, this is the Q-function: the tail probability of the normal distribution.",
+      "reference": "Should we rename this to tailProbability?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Add the issue number too i#4400"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why make this modifiable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Why this file is changed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a description here.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure that we need this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this going to cause issues in any other places were someone forgets the version? Should we consider also checking for type=project?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does this have retries? Is there a possibility that customer would hit throttle errors here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "i noted that we are inconsistent with when we indent includes (see atomics.h which is rather different) and for example cpu.c which is also different. we seem to have 3 styles."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Deleting the files before starting the audit helps avoid stale results if the new file is not created."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove this blank line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "This is... quite unconventional (use a map entry as a key). I would suggest making your own data class for the key."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why are these colors needed to be specified here? when are they used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Nit: no need to change this method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Why a blank line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why remove the `.html_safe` here? Should we use `sanitize` or `raw` instead? This info comes off of the org edit page and is entered by users."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((()))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I think we need some docs about how to set this parameter correctly. Are we OK with changing the public API like this? We probably at least want to make a change notice to the release doc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "When we undo this for 1.3, do we not need to leave these three entries intact to avoid renumbering of the subsequent constants? If so perhaps the changes to this file should be pulled into a separate initial commit so we can just `git revert` the remainder..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a new `ShapeValidations()` to the `Setup()` function.",
+      "reference": "This is never set anywhere in the `cli/gen-api` folder. Should it be?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `client-go/clientcmd` file.",
+      "reference": "All the changes in this commit are mechanical. Produced by the script in the previous commit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendend));endendendendendendend));endendendendendendendend));endendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendend));endendendendendendendendendend));endendendendendend",
+      "reference": "What's the difference between these 2 versions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@red2k18 Are we sure its correct to only have 1 now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "@greglandrum interesting, is this related to #3307 by any chance?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Minor: how about moving the trailing `if` to an `elsif` above?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "That's only executed when users switch from 2.2 to 2.3. Please create a new block with code `2050000` for the next release :) Please also adapt the version number in PodDbAdapter"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Safe to reference c.srv without capturing it first under a client lock?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "@vincepri blame tells me this was you, any objections to the change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to wait for all inbounds to start serverUnderTest.",
+      "reference": "@abhinav here is where i need to be able to block/wait until the server is started"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "It seems to me as an unrelated change. Could you please revert it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "~Why are putting all these APIs in their own ~packages~ files? So many more ~directories~ files, to what end? Why not just have them all be a part of the same API file and all live alongside each other so you can easily see them?~ Edit: nevermind, probably works best in separate files."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")##############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "This likely needs to be double checked -- I recall being convinced at the time of writing this, but now I am less sure"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "For a followup - it is better to use acceptlist/denylist. I realize this is a historical artifact of our codebase."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Looks like glassfish went a bit nuts doing a refactor"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Couldn't you use position:absolute or float to move inline elements outside their parent? Through clipping an child element can also be outside it's parent. There are probably some other ways to do it too. So I'm not sure the assumption you're making here is right."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "This could be copied into iceberg code to avoid the spark internal dep? We could use a version check to adjust the method used if needed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This one had me stumped!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the `` here.",
+      "reference": "Note that this name differs from the name used as default (and thus used now that you removed this). That should be fine, but wanted to flag it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why public and not protected?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We definitely need to address this duplication after MVP"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the user input.",
+      "reference": "This will always generate a label for the first keyword, which means this will be a label linked to no element after the first keyword is entered. This label should be generated inside the `values.map` next to the `` it is for, because the ID changes based on the index. Also, we have a `VisuallyHidden` component I'd prefer we use over the CSS class. Building as many things out of components is more React-y. Admittedly it's sort of a preference, but it's why we have the `VisuallyHidden` component. So let's use that instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not free the desktop.",
+      "reference": "Does it make sense for this to be fatal? Could there be an embedded application that does not have xcursor themes at all? For instance, compositors without a pointer (like a touch-screen kiosk) will never show a cursor. I think I'm ok with this assumption since it simplifies the code and rootston is assumed to have desktop features, but we should always make sure xcursor is not required to be used in the library."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `TopicFilterBase` class.",
+      "reference": "would rename to TopicsFilter and original one to SequenceTopicsFilter"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Is the idea that ``self.keys[0]`` here normally matches ``init_key``?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Can this be clarified to \"Exit early when hwnd is the windows desktop handle, UiaHasServerSideProvider would return false anyway.\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'm okay with leaving VCPULimit and MemoryLimit on our internal model"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "5 or 10?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we explain more here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `aws-sdk.go` and move it to `aws-sdk.go`",
+      "reference": "I've been struggling with this on my cloud-init integration work as well. In addition to info that is currently stored in the cluster providerstatus, we also need some of the info that is available within the base cluster object as well. I think it would make sense to unify the machine and cluster info needed into a consolidated struct rather than continuing to add additional disparate structs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Why not `@InternalApi`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "FYI: `GenericMeta` is renamed to `_GenericAlias` in Python3.7."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "So this hides the link to re-order sections on Historic Templates? Good catch, Just checked on DMPonline and hitting that throws a 404"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this. I think it would be better to have a `reporter.start_time = ::RSpec::Core::Time.now.now.configuration.reset_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_filters.start_start_filters.",
+      "reference": "Is `Reporter#reset` no longer used? If so, can we remove it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "same concern here about difference in the write scalar implementation. I am not sure if this could present a consensus problem or not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can we remove this file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log message.",
+      "reference": "Why listing only first error reason (`ErrStatus.Details.Causes[0].Message`)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Now that this is true, do we have to ignore it with V1 Tables?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this in a future PR.",
+      "reference": "prefer if (condition) { stuff; } to if!(condition) { continue; } stuff"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "Should this section not be converted to a secondary action list?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `CommandDispatcher` class. I don't think that's a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This askes a blocking question, which means a local Qt eventloop will be running. While this is unavoidable sometimes, the async functions should be used whenever possible (`message.confirm_async` in this case). This means: - Split everything after this question in a separate private method (you can probably just call it `_tab_close`) - If the tab is not pinned, just call `_tab_close` directly - If it is pinned, call `message.confirm_async` with `yes_action=self._tab_close`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));););););;;;););););););););););););););););););;;;;);););););););););););;;;;;;);););););););););;;;;;;);););););););););;;;;;;););););););););;;;;;;;;;););););););;;;;;););););););););););;;;;;;;;;););););););););););););););;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Can we deuglify this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "@skestle Just recognized that the `::apply` is not necessary. Does it compile if you leave it away? Could you please check that, I'm on vacation and have no IDE at hand... Thx!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "Looks like this is an unnecessary change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name of the rule.",
+      "reference": "This one won't change as the resource is not included in the project getting tested with the composite root."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We have `stdbool` imported, might as well use that for clarity."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))#####endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbeginbegin",
+      "reference": "Why do we not also have integration tests for postgres?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should skip this test.",
+      "reference": "I think its safe to remove this if we're removing `reIndex` outright. The description shows us that the test is \"An example showing how to force a reindex of a collection\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct error code.",
+      "reference": "Can you make this hexadecimal to match the other constants?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Can this get moved to `Bolt::Project#validate`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'm pretty sure it doesn't harm, but don't we have a second pass here with the reverse() operation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "This is not a standard capability and should be hidden behind a vendor prefix: -chromium-takesHeapSnapshot"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This shouldn't work with pointers -- prefer references unless you can meaningfully pass `nullptr`. The address-of operator here is clunky at best."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Sidenote: some day we'll drop the avr-gcc and avr-libc dependencies so that this case becomes supported."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the test to use a different type of limit.",
+      "reference": "do we still need this method?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this.",
+      "reference": "It's better to not leave this old code here... it just clutters things up and makes reading the code more confusing. We can always recover the old code from the repository if needed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "Again, you don't want to depend on glassfish."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.",
+      "reference": "This shouldn't be required. What was going on here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why add this here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nullability does not apply to headers type (that is always an object)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Do we also need to add the iova, or is that done somewhere else?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "why change this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid",
+      "reference": "If there is no guarantee that tv_sec is of type `time_t`, IMO you should copy the value instead of enforcing a pointer typecast."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a check here. I don't think we should add a check here.",
+      "reference": "Should we validate the suffix before going to the filesystem?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It feels like we should be working to reduce/eliminate our global vars. I'm not sure it adds much here. Any objection to just removing it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the migration file.",
+      "reference": "did you consider using AR enums for this? would give us all the boolean methods (`weekly?` etc) for free"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return None here.",
+      "reference": "This may change \"\" into None. Better return filename."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": ":+1: That does resolve my security concerns about this feature."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Could you add a docstring?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this still be `Region()`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "This shouldn't be here but `self.connected = None` in `__init__` instead, otherwise that'd be an attribute which is set this way in _every_ instance of that class (i.e. a class rather than an instance variable). I'd also say let's make it \"private\" (i.e. `_connected`) and please add a quick note about what it is to the docstring of the class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to create_no_window here.",
+      "reference": "This would be better served as a method/property that is set when people don't want to a window."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I was dubious about putting getNonStreamingMethods in the context, but after some thought, I have decided to embrace the approach. In this particular case, the loop is supposed to be over page streaming methods. So, could you add a getPageStreamingMethods() method in the context, use it here, and remove the isPageStreaming() check below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "LooseVersion class can help here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "`const Dims zeros(shape.size(), 0);`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Would be good for this not to say `10` anymore..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "See above, we don't need to pass the module name here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d\u201d))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This is random line :-) overridden String type by custom trimmed - please change that commit message to something like \"introduced custom String type with automatic trimming\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `RealmConstructor.Sync.User` method.",
+      "reference": "My personal taste: \"depreciated\" -> \"deprecated\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "this includes the port as well right? should the name be `destinationServicePortName`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "We can import all of them in one line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "this was wrong, the rest were just inconsistent :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I gave them the EXACT SAME NAMES in my branch :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "What would you think stat'ing the directory first before doing the log+mkdirall and only proceeding if the directory does not exist? The logging might be less confusing (I'd be wondering why it was logging that it was creating the directory when I knew it already existed)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep keep keep keep keep keep keep keep",
+      "reference": "Sorry about the confusion, I'm trying to address that in the PR follow-up. If we ever have `Span` objects, then accessing their properties is going to be safe. The only question remaining is \"What is the runtime type for Scope.Span?\" and we just have to account for it when it is `Datadog.Trace.Span` and when it is not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new test for this.",
+      "reference": "I was using this imports for writing the results to file to more easily check that it was valid JSON. You can probably remove these `java.io` imports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "You should probably include a `json:...` annotation here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "can container ID > 255 chars? why are we doing this check?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this field is a valid field. I think it should be `prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_if :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_unless :prohibited_when :prohibited_when :prohibited :prohibited_when :prohibited :prohibited :prohibited :prohibited :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :prohibits :same :same :same :same :same",
+      "reference": "*\"This **field field** prohibits :other from being present.\"*, **field** word repeated is right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `agent/flowexporter/flowrecords.go` file.",
+      "reference": "nit: no need to add an alias for this case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the logEnv to \"QUIC_GO_LOG_LEVEL\" or \"QUIC_GO_LOG_LEVEL\"",
+      "reference": "Or `QUIC_LOG_LEVEL`. Which one do you prefer?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Minor: you can set it to byte here and only set it to *virtualDiscDesc.CapacityAllocationUnits if that's not nil/\"\". Saves two lines"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "While reading this I found that it makes actually little sense for \"beers\" to have a \"fingerprint\". We might want to do another pass on the examples here to use something that actually makes more sense to the reader. This could be done in another issue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Thank you! That's better, especially the conversion test should not test the mkString method :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "You're basically converting client to screen coordinates here, doing it manually. Is there a specific reason why you aren't using clientToScreen here? Does it fail?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This needs to be done for server-side copies too, earlier in the function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the API. I don't think we should add this to the API.",
+      "reference": "Do we want to add in `profile` here as well so we request access to the end user's default profile claims like name?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `proposal.approve!` method, but I don't think we need to do this in the `proposal.approve!` method. I don't think we need to do this in the `proposal.approve!` method.",
+      "reference": "I am not sure what the difference between approving and full approving is..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please back out the import changes in files you haven't touched. I think these happen if you run goimports without having the vendor directory populated"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.",
+      "reference": "Many tests in this class seem to have just been fortunate that `SolrIndexSearcher` ignored `fl` and retrieved all fields when not using lazy loading."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is this really needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Is this necessary with line 38?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "DO we want to have >= here? Or =="
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can you also add this `\"version\"` tag to the CoreTags? Now that we're targeting the service/env/version trio"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "This entry will be incompatible with the currently implemented formatting rules. Maximum 120 characters per line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Let's call this color_host_output or some such - preserve_host_output makes it sound like you won't get any output without this being set."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "suggestion: if we perhaps make `attributes` a getter in `virtualNode`, it does look seamless to access the property, same as what we have done for `isFocusable` or `tabbableElements`. `node.attributes` can become `virtualNode.attributes`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "I think a float value fits better."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should use verbs here.",
+      "reference": "This should be (POST,DELETE) `/pss/subscribe/{topic}` for subscriptions and there should be `/pss/send/{topic}` for sending."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Closing over the closure arguments is a neat trick :+1: Love it :100:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the test case sensitivity is on.",
+      "reference": "Does this need to be a block or can it be an expression?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `allowedPostRequest(req)`",
+      "reference": "req.getQueryString()!= null is not necessary since same check is already done in allowedPostRequest"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(end(end(end))))/(end/end/end/end/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "As per go/actools-regapic-design, in the final product, generated GAPICs must be able to support multiple transports if supported by the API. For Java, we'll support this in the microgenerator; the monolith generates single-transport GAPICs. For PHP, the situation is likely similar, though on a longer timescale. All this to say that I would appreciate structuring the code in terms of \"supports REST\" rather than \"REST only\", but only where this doesn't require undue work. For everything else, please add a TODO to the effect of \"we're generating single-transport GAPICs for now, though in the fullness of time we'll generate multi-transport GAPICs.\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "here is `:seconds` missing again"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Changed this helper to also get class name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "I think there's another spot for this in DefaultCapabilityMatcher"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Why the rename from PONY_SCHED_BATCH? ACTOR_DEFAULT_BATCH is less meaningful to me than SCHED_BATCH."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Let's be sure we have an issue that tracks this, filed against testnet."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "There should be no space before!Buffer"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Same here, we need the default padding for this story."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think this should go away, its noise in the grand scheme of things."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `updateRepository` method.",
+      "reference": "Maybe just call `ioutil.WriteFile` with 0 bytes? And Make an error log `log.Error` if any error occurs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should have a service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service service",
+      "reference": "`this.ieService_` should be initialized to null in the constructor."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "I just noticed that we use Return here, when we have logically allowed a packet, whereas in the forward chain we use AcceptAction. Do you know why that is?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This is public method, we need to deprecated this method first and add new updated method for it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think that you don't want to have these workarounds; you want to make sure that the relayTemplates is configured correctly. If not, we need to fix it there."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "This field is not needed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "move to line 18 below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `aws-sdk-s3` file.",
+      "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Thats odd, I'd actually not expect this output at all..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "As a side note, I get why this is up here (sort order), but it'd be easier to not forget to update it if it were down next to `1.x` -- would it be acceptable to make that change the next time I make this sort of PR? :smile: :innocent: (don't want to hold this one up since folks are blocked on getting this one in, it's a pretty superficial change, and I probably won't have cycles again for a few days to update the PR with the change :sweat_smile:)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "this class is permissioning so let's keep \"Onchain\" here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "we can be more specific to call out the it is \"AutoRest C# code generator\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `VirtualNode` class.",
+      "reference": "Ditto for not adding this to the axe namespace."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Should we just remove this file? Having it present but empty feels misleading"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Would it make sense to include an `Untrust` as well? If I were playing around with this on the CLI I wouldn't want to make a change I couldn't undo."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `SolrDefaultBackendFactory` class.",
+      "reference": "It might be better to call this `$createRecordMethod` since it's not a full PHP callback, just a method name for the plugin manager."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")))))))))))))))((((((((((((----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "remove this line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I've never seen this syntax before, it's still just an array, the difference is that it's an array of MainMenuItems instead of an array of arrays."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: to match the others: s/private/Private/"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Maybe just IEnumerable? Not sure myself."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "do we need this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "Would want @matthiashanel to have a look since if I recall he had to add the shallowCopy() to fix some bugs during reload. That being said, since I believe the $G account cannot referenced in configurations, this should not be a problem, but Matthias has looked at this in more details in the past."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The descriptions are incorrect"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "if we are returning the `ws` here when passing in `se:cdp` we can just return it straight or do we have to make a request to get the `ws` address?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning message.",
+      "reference": "Please only indent this by four spaces."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What's the reason behind these characters?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Minor: The name of this specs seems a little off now"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())())(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I'd suggest using `ast_error_continue` here to get the `apply` message in the `Info` part of the error report."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "If we decide to change the name of the.ini setting, we might also want to review the naming of this property and related code. Maybe a simple `getOptions` or `getSettings` would be more concise than `getTabDetailConfig`. At very least, I don't think we need Tab in the method name since the method belongs to a helper with \"Tabs\" in the name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Use const for \"user\", same as below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "->setUnsubscribed(false) would be better :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I now think singular `Sport` is better, but I will wait for the first round of feedback before updating."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Don't you need = something?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Looks like this could be `const` (I realize it wasn't like that before)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum enum",
+      "reference": "Maybe just `FAILED`. We can't be sure loading was the thing that failed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "You have replaced single quotes with double ones, this fails linting and our current coding style. Please fix this, otherwise it's a whopping of 1200 LoC while in reality it should be rather small."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "@danieloeh @TomHennen. Some of these files are using spaces, the others use tabs. Is there a project wide preference? I personally like spaces, because they are consistent across editors"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a counter here. I don't think we should have a counter here.",
+      "reference": "I guess this is ok for backwards-compatibility? Maybe it'd be better to check arity in the helpers? Or just call it out in the release notes, because there are at least a couple projects on github that overrode `initialize`.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "At some point, we would like to get rid of these custom injections as well. Looks Ok for now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this flag is set to true, but I think it should be set to true in case customers need retrocompatibility only.",
+      "reference": "nit: Not a fan of \"fix\" in the name, but don't have a better suggestion"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Since we're calling `self.tab_url(idx)` a third time here already, can you please add a `url = self.tab_url(idx)` somewhere above (e.g. after all the `fields[...] =...` assignments) and change the calls here to `url.host()` etc.?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "alphasort this import"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `cout<flags == ASIO_DISPOSABLE);` because `ASIO_DISPOSABLE` has a value of `0` as defined in the enum in `asio.h` and because when `ev->flags` is assigned `ASIO_DISPOSABLE` it is assigned as `ev->flags = ASIO_DISPOSABLE` unsetting any other flags previously assigned."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "this is not required, right? its the default already..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "\"contingent to\" -> \"contingent on\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate error class for this.",
+      "reference": "Does pandas throw an exception like this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it's better to keep the state state state state state state state state state state state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_state_",
+      "reference": "The point of the exercise has been to eliminate CoreChecks as an object dependency for DescriptorSet et. al."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate class.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need to make so much more of this ScanContext public?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `multiple` instead of `multiple`",
+      "reference": "is choice_name not needed anymore?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "Is this the right place to do the validation? If a user adds a bad property or performs some schema update that causes a validation error, that would break all writes to the table. To me, it doesn't seem like we are catching the problem early enough and possibly allowing a typo to break scheduled jobs. What do you think about adding this validation when altering the table? `UpdateProperties` could check whether any properties starting with `write.metadata.metrics` were modified and run this. Similarly, `UpdateSchema` could run this as well, although I think that we should probably modify `UpdateSchema` to simply update the properties for column renames (if that's easily done)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Why is this necessary? Just in order to get an indexed loop?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a counter here.",
+      "reference": "instead of using `prometheus.Gauge`, using `promethus.Counter` will be better."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "maybe we should have a unit test for this and then just test one case in `spec/services/ncr/approval_manager_spec.rb`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why is this necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a static method, not a static method.",
+      "reference": "Minor: If this is going to be public, we should fix the name. `get` doesn't add any value. How about `distributionModeFor` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This needs a more self-explaining name. Maybe `.is_focused`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `goAzureMappings` file.",
+      "reference": "minor: I'd add a space between `,` & `'paginggroup'`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the command line. I don't think we should add this to the command line.",
+      "reference": "\"Re-upload all fragments (even if fragment is already in registry)\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the rule spec. I don't think we should add this to the rule spec.",
+      "reference": "I don't see us ignoring the field. Are we sure Prometheus wouldn't refuse to load the rules?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I wonder if we can just check if the mSession is active and then only call `setActive(true)` and `callSurfaceChanged()` if it isn't?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "A default value of 100 MB maybe too small. I understand that this is good for mixed workloads, but do consider than plans with Unpack, especially when used for insert/upsert are simple. Unpack is always serial and part of master exe. Often there is only one in a query. The cost of having a low value here seems to be that queue length from unpack could be limited by this when we are loading a table with wide rows (even if actual data in row is not wide). We know from performance runs that queue length is critical to upsert load performance. This is a hunch on my part and could be misguided. It will be good to performance test for upsert of table with wide rows, if you think that is worthwhile."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "think we should pass in ctx, and use ctx.GreenlandHeight inside bucketPool to determine if create or not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "A correct by unrelated change. We'll slide this one in without another word ;)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `checkouts_path` method.",
+      "reference": "Why remove this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to use Twig_Environment here.",
+      "reference": "I still see some usages of not namespaced variants (look for Twig_ in project, about 42 matches). Is it intentional?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the specs to the `specs` file.",
+      "reference": "Is this a new dependency? Does this require a dep update?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this if we don't have it.",
+      "reference": "> opts.generate_hexfloat_in_json && **IsFloat**(type.base_type)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "As an alternative to this, we could also create a new method, like `Common() *AppManifest` This way we don't have to add a new method to the interface everytime we add a new field to the `AppManifest`. This is a nit though so it's up to you."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add `harparser` to the `harparser` file.",
+      "reference": "As long as we have this feature as an inline script, I'm inclined to remove the dependency here. I'd suggest that we just try to import harparser and pytz and throw an error instructing the user to install the dependencies (catch for `ImportError`). In the long term, we probably want to include that in the mitmproxy core, but we first want to introduce a clean extension interface before that's going to happen. As soon as said interface is there, porting the inline script and adding the dependency again should be a breeze."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I think it would be better to use `require('rechoir').prepare(require('interpret').extensions, './.gulp/gulpfile.iced')` instead of `require('interpret').extensions', './.gulp/gulpfile.iced')`",
+      "reference": "makes it work nice with vscode. all logic is now in `.gulp/*.iced` files"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "should a similar change be done for findElement?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(())((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "`+` -> ` + ` I guess. Same below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((()))",
+      "reference": "`typeof` is not a function - its an operator, and the standard way to use it is as `typeof foo!==...` (i.e. no parenthesis). Also, I would personally use `opts.fee!= null` instead (with a non-strict comparison, which also identifies `undefined` values because `null == undefined`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason why you're not using Rspec `skip`? It allows to specify message and makes it clearly visible in test results which tests were skipped."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `firstSyncSetsSuccessTime` or `firstSyncSetsSuccessTime`",
+      "reference": "how about \"all matching SyncSets and SelectorSyncSets\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What is the logic behind `ReadVectorSize` reading `CountElement64`, then skipping `T` (in this case `unsigned`)? Naming doesn't cover what's actually happening here. Ideally I'd also take this through a `files` layer, any input as to how?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "This looks like an unused import to me?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`RW` means read/write. Why do we have it here, as part of a func name?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "I'd keep this at `info` level..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think you missed this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "List all of the current TFMs so we know if this gets outdated. E.g. this breaks if we add 2.2."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "here, you want to use req.GetXattrOpt() referring to the in line 514 of api.proto. This will be nil if not provided. See the example above on line 801 on this file"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I think this should be done outside LocalPSMP, but in `getNextInQueue`. The reason is that I want to reduce the dependence of the media players on the preferences and database. Also, it will then probably work on Chromecast."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please remove it or remove all `std::` namespace prefixes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should add this to the README.txt file.",
+      "reference": "wait! I'm confused - is that an empty file?!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "These should all call `findUpVirtual`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This changes the behavior. Original behavior was \"set if not set\", while new is \"just set\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Let's keep using the regular expression to make sure that the token is well-formed. I think the regular expression should be altered instead of doing a substring."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be a new array.",
+      "reference": "All the operations are delegated to this entity, hence the rename. `back` can have too many meanings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "@trevor-vaughan it looks like the spec failures are caused by the fact that although it was a great idea to put the guard clause here first & get the error case out of the way, the main code path has been erased when I assume it should be just below the guard clause."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config.Protocol.SmallLambda.",
+      "reference": "Could you delete this constant?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "looks like this snuck in from your other change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "These env vars are not set in any CF environment, on purpose, because we are moving away from using env vars to store role-based information and instead using the database. So in a CF environment, the wrong emails get used (the defaults, rather than what is in the db)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.",
+      "reference": "this partial is used also for previewing a template, did you test if still works?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate file. I don't think we should keep this in a separate file. I think we should keep this in a separate file. I'm not sure if we should keep this in a separate file.",
+      "reference": "Would it be better to put like `Which Dockerfile would you like to use for %s?`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "You mistakenly removed `/docs` here, please add it"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I missed this earlier, but why does this say \"file blocks\"? This should probably be \"recommended split locations\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please change this to non-exported."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This is ignoring compatibility: it needs to check the size to ensure this field exists in the client."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Do all the prepare authors also need to be unique? Or is it enough the we have minimumPrepareMessages. I guess I'm wondering if need a hasDuplicateAuthors check like in the RoundChangeCertificateValidator."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "we had some situations where we merged some promql bits then took them out. i'm not sure what's going on here, but unless your code actually needs promql (probably not?) let's remove this line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "Annotations in this hunk should follow PhpDoc style (above the occurrence, type first)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is an improvement - thanks! Could we rephrase slightly to not use the phrase \"is not supported\" -- instead stating _WHAT_ isn't valid please? e.g. maybe `String.format(\"Unsupported BoundType provided: %s\" type)` or something like that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: `procfd` seems more appropriate now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Let's not call it django. Maybe `auth_provider_headers`? `auth_headers`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should we mention TLS map here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "remove this empty line pl0x"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why not have this in the `Dispatcher`? Doesn't seem like NCR-specific functionality."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "If you need only test db, use `memdb.NewTestDB(t)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure I like setting the IsEmpty property true for upgraded connections since it feels a middle misleading. Maybe we can leave the ForUpgrade class as is and change this condition to `if (!messageBody.IsEmpty &&!messageBody.RequestUpgrade)` to make things more explicit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `proposals_on_client_data_id_and_client_data_type`",
+      "reference": "git checkout since this is unrelated to this PR? (running migrations also changes this for me -- not sure why it keeps going back and forth"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this field should be set in the __init__ method.",
+      "reference": "Is this change needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Isn't the % 128 redundant here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be true.",
+      "reference": "Are you testing that the values are always false? I think you should test for setting values to true or false, right? Who is going to take action with these values?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Please change MPI to CCTOOLS_WITH_MPI"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why you can't use function here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "We should scope this down to only the methods we use."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Oh, thanks for catching - I thought I've catched all after changing `mkString(infix, prefix, suffix)` to `mkString(prefix, infix, suffix)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Suggestion: `.. the CertificateRequest is ready for signing` - could we perhaps word this differently? I understand that in this case it will be the associated X.509 certificate that can now be signed, so maybe `the certificate is ready for signing`? (Same with `CertificateRequestReasonDenied`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return null here.",
+      "reference": "We should use `! isValidAccountID( accountID )` for the `accountID` checks."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "That alternative does seem better. Did you want to try to do it in this PR? It makes sense to me that the inventory would always be available before creating the executor."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Missing the `-y` argument which all other `apt-get install` commands have."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log error.",
+      "reference": "So I think we are going to settle on the \"concise and elegant\" `PRI` macros as they are the safest option for now. Even though they make my eyes bleed a little..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Interesting, was this needed for a test case to pass? I figured if there is no opening brace, there is definitely no placeholder -- we don't even have to check for a closing one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "I think we want to provide getAction API instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a bug?",
+      "reference": "There is also `winVersion.isWin10`. I think this should be converted to use the helper function. The helper has a note that it doesn't work in source copies, but looking at the implementation it looks equivalent to what you have here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "This doesn't seem like it should be part of this pull request."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is the idea that `@product` (and `@workshop` for `workshops_controller`) would eventually go away here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `bscMainnetPreverifiedHashes` array.",
+      "reference": "We should add those only once we have successfully synced to the BSC main net, we have a utility to generate those. Please remove for now"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.",
+      "reference": "And how is that related?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "this should be required"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This appears to be unused"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think that \"table's state\" isn't clear enough. How about \"history of the table's current snapshot\" like the one below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This looks like a bug: pretty sure there are scatter-gather instructions on AArch64. Ditto below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "No need to change this: id love if we changed as a team to unkeyed fields, it ends up catching a lot more at compile time, at minimal cost"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should this be in the parent struct? `AppManifest` since it's embedded to `LBFargateManifest` it'll get the method as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "\"Openvpn check\" we could move this to separate prefix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "body is being used here for the first time without every being populated. This will error. To run tests do `./go clean test_py` and that will run the Firefox tests"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We don't return now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This might end up not doing exactly what we want (the retry only picks up the `go get`, not the `go build`, due to the `&&`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the copyright file to the `ConsoleExporterOptions.cs` file. I don't think we should add the copyright file to the `ConsoleExporterOptions.cs` file. I think we should add the copyright file to the `ConsoleExporterOptions.cs` file.",
+      "reference": "Is there a BOM change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "It's not a good practise to delete the public static constant."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I deleted this because `WellFormed` is immediately called by `verify.TxnPool` below. Can someone please double check this for me since it's... pretty important"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the setup.py file.",
+      "reference": "Did you actually test this with ply 3.4? That release is pretty old (2011), so I think we can bump this to at least 3.6 (2015) or even 3.10 (2017)..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This can be simplified somewhat to `pointer.Int32Ptr(0)`. But it is not necessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Clever but perhaps confusing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to deleteSecretReferences here.",
+      "reference": "@abutcher Is it a safe assumption that secrets are the only objects that need to get attached to syncsets?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should you capture o.asflr before releasing consumer's lock?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `if (engineTools!= null) { return; }`",
+      "reference": "Just asking: Should this happen, that null is passed? If this is the case I think we should think about passing an `Optional` object to the method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "what about making a `ProfilesController` or `UserProfilesController` and having this be a `show` action instead? That would be more Railsy (although that can be considered a compliment or a dis, depending on who you are :hamburger: )"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I'd move the empty assignment and non-null case into the if check directly above (adding an else clause as needed)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Please remove this extra line of whitespace"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this to `$lastProcessedId`",
+      "reference": "maybe it's time to rename `ProductSearchExportWithFilter` to something better, what do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Instead of adding new code here - can you move these methods to agent_capability.go, so the same is used for unix and windows as well. this will need removal of these methods from agent_capability_unix.go as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Make it the last parameter, just in case someone uses the API with non-keyword args."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Don't extend an instance initialized by `Struct.new`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Just wondering - would it make more sense to simply replace `PMIX_DESTRUCT(&t->nslist)` with `PMIX_LIST_DESTRUCT(&t->nslist)` here, and then add `PMIX_RELEASE(p->jobbkt)` to the `pmix_nspace_caddy_t` destructor on line 154 of src/include/pmix_globals.c? Seems to me like we always want to have these things removed/destructed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I think, we should fix/improve AbstractRuleSetFactoryTest. I guess, both apex and visualforce rules are now tested, which is unnecessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "In php8 named parameters were introduced and now it is required to match called method parameter name when setting parameters by array destructing or `call_user_func_array()` etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "easily possible to get that information without exposing internal information"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need tristate logic (pe, foss, nil)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this change needs to be reverted to what is on `master`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Do you still need to call the superclass `createVariable` if you've already determined that the variable exists?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "Ignoring the pack entry from an existing entry but using the new entry from a non-finalized index, is subtle enough that it needs explaining."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "This is a revert, is it really an issue?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "can we delete this file altogether?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Suggestion: log some additional info here so we know where we are i.e 'Failed to prepare coverage framework..'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `TracerConstants` class.",
+      "reference": "There didn't seem to be any good place to put constants that are.NET Tracer-specific, so I created this internal static class. If there's a better place, let me know."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `UpdateDeviceStatusBuffer`",
+      "reference": "Log message should be started with upper-case word."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.",
+      "reference": "changes for example usage in this class"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I know frameworks that support current directory when loading dependencies, is this a limitation of the requirejs loader or can we fix it somehow?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in EnableApplication"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "@jemc, this is one change needed in `generate_multi_dot_name`. I believe this * will do no harm to working pony code: The new code was added in a place where it is throwing an assert. So no working code will get affected. * is in sync with the rest of the method: if the parent ast node has null `data`, we are supposed to return empty string. That is possible when we have expressions wrapped in braces."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Should not be a static import."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `Attachment.Status.String()`",
+      "reference": "should we be using `aws.String` here? it seems there are a few other spots we could use `aws.String` in the `if change.Attachment!= nil {...` block."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new URL to the page.",
+      "reference": "We can't pass raw dates like this because they need to be formatted as `YYYYMMDD` as noted in the IB. We added the `generateDateRangeArgs` utilities to handle this for us, as well as abstracting the relationship between arg name and specific dates which is not obvious just by looking at it. Let's update it to use `generateDateRangeArgs( { startDate, endDate } )` instead Use care to make sure we're sourcing the utility from Analytics utils though since AdSense has its own version by the same name, which is different."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean parameter.",
+      "reference": "`default=True` shouldn't be used for BoolParameters iirc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It would be better to use `return refStr[12:]`. or `11`... I have problem with counting.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Pretty sure these should only contribute to the runtime hash."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `main-container` so that we don't have to change the layout.",
+      "reference": "Just verifying: this change doesn't break the 18f layout, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a yarpcError?",
+      "reference": "we should keep this counter using the \"isYarpcError\" api"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Could we just use case insensitive strings as keys instead of creating a new map implementation? e.g. simply using a treemap with a comparator `Map idToPos = new TreeMap<>(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER);` could work I think"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `GetSlot` method.",
+      "reference": "I think this should be a throw. Or the method should be TryGetSlot?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should catch some exceptions.",
+      "reference": "We don't usually put spaces between ( and [, and I think `path` should be passed by reference."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "IsStackable````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````",
+      "reference": "Make sure to `snake_case` locally scoped variable names in the future"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Maybe we should use underscores like `health_check` - what do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do a TrimSpace before setting."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Are the fields in this struct grouped by IP address family or by function? There are separate fields for IPv4Addresses and IPv6Addresses, but a single field for DomainNameServers. Should this new field be named SubnetGatewayAddress with type array consisting of both IPv4 and IPv6 gateways?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": ".find(id) is being deprecated to Rails 5."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should import iris.cube from iris.experimental.equalise_cubes import equalise_cubes",
+      "reference": "Will be good to have the iris interface moved to geoviews. Could this be done for 1.10.6?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "does this get wrapped in the calling method?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This test should not test case-insensivity, only the successful group authorization. The permission tests should do that.",
+      "reference": "Do we still need this test case? If your new test cases test this, then we can remove it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `roles` table in the `roles` table.",
+      "reference": "If you want to express \"any role that is not creator\" you could use the following statement: Role.where(plan: self).where(Role.not_creator_condition).any? which would be less verbose and a bit more efficient if it is used for Yes/No shared?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove it. I don't think we should remove it.",
+      "reference": "Do we need any update on the test side?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "There's a few `return nil` cases above this -- we should probably move this above the big switch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed. I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "`lile *LeaseInLedgerError` to reduce copying?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "should it be `newsessionqueue` or `newsessionqueuer`? In case we'd like to be consistent"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "We don't have a requirement anywhere in Test Platform for GetStream() with write access. It is ok to directly change `return new FileStream(filePath, mode, FileAccess.Read)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "FWIW `from qutebrowser.browser import hints` is okay - it's just things like `from qutebrowser.browser.hints import HintManager` I try to avoid."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "@preda-bogdan let's use a filter for the header classes, something like, hfg_header_classes where we hook this logic, in neve pro"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Out of curiosity.. is there a rule to determine the package name as prevDirectory+currentDirectory."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It seems this needs to check the lazy cxt switching flag. It is used on the initial thread for early injection and in other places where the lazy switch should apply."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Why not use the JSdoc annotation as it did before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Why don't we drop the packageImplementationVersion in general? That way the version will be fetch all that time only from the properties file and it will be consistent."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Please use the style of the rest of the code, a space between the type and `*`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a test?",
+      "reference": "nit: remove extra blank lines."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a default value.",
+      "reference": "nit: What do you think of `copilot-task-group`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should check whether or not the input node has a value since we can just have an onChange on an uncontrolled component as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "I think there should be some reasoning below this line about the version updating."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `h2o_http1client_body_cb` class.",
+      "reference": "Please use `h2o_lcstris` instead of `strncasecmp` so that the comparison would be a complete match (instead of a prefix match; current code would yield true if [val,len] is [\"O\", 1]) and that it would be locale-independent."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "I prefer if possible for `if`/`else` statements to have the positive case first."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Docstring would be nice"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Low risk to fix this by default because existing baseline consumers pass this check. We don't attempt to fix checks that have been opted out of."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `impl_initialize()` method.",
+      "reference": "What about `VOLTA72`, `TURING75`, `AMPERE80` and `AMPERE86`? We only want to set the number of teams for these two architectures or for all the architectures newer than Maxwell?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Since we have specified `load_from`, `pretrained` can be left None."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I prefer to translate these `else if` into `switch` for more readability."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This can also be a local variable in `create`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Why not use `path.Join`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not `export default API` instead? This ensures we export the same that we export on the global."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))(()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "This is a good change I think. It greatly helps reduce name conflicts."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "cluster not having omitempty, does this imply that cluster is required? seems empty is valid so just checking"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@aws/aws-ecs-agent, @yumex93: how concerned should we be about user provided envvar names clobbering existing envvars? i'm not convinced we should be doing additional validation here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "nit: aspects are defined in `OperationBase`, should `defineAspects` live there as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why the `os.path.abspath`? `os.path.dirname` should always give a valid directory path."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think we should not consider special engine types on this level. I would prefer to build the specific engine path based on `application.user.engines` later on."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Is `rbegin` correct? We can't make sure that the last index column is the `rbegin` of `scanItems`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to set chainID here. I don't think we should set chainID here.",
+      "reference": "check it is!= 0, just like `EVMNetworkID` above"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "if you just do \"this.GetType().Name\" and \"this.exporter.GetType().Name\", we get what we need."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "That's the code that would prevent any SalesforceSDKTest from running. At class loading time, SalesforceSDKManager.getInstance() would throw a RuntimeException because init() had never been called."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value here.",
+      "reference": "there is no \"DEFAULT_REVISION\" logic, no need to define this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Do we need to set the url?",
+      "reference": "so this is to fix a scenario where the app is first launched normally, then background and foreground through the link, we are not updating loginOption"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "It doesn't seem like the right way to implement this, because you add a new element that doesn't really exist (noteTextViewer). Instead you should modify the command handler `if (command.name === 'focusElement' && command.target === 'noteBody') {` in NoteText.jsx. Then focus either the editor or the viewer depending on what's currently visible."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We don't add blank lines in imports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.",
+      "reference": "Please add your name to the copyright list."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You can elide the `if` check for empty string, because if it's not a value that is set, the string will be empty anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Different i18n keys. By mistake or on purpose?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it would be better to create a new policy and add the policy to the policy.",
+      "reference": "Given the description for this is `// Describes how the ACME challenge self check behaves when it fails.`, perhaps `RetryForever` is better terminology here as when the check fails, we don't just wait, we retry periodically."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Nit: let's add a more descriptive prefix in line with the other ones? E.g. `Unable to import key`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This looks like it will pass an array as `:key` in the default case. That doesn't reflect how this will actually work in practice."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "Do we need this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I am a bit confused about this function. If it is used to set priority, we actually use function \"Table.BuildFlow(priority uint16)\" to set the value. If it is used to parse the priority value, I think adding a property(if you don't want to consume Match.Priority directly) to cache it and consume that property should be simpler than using string regex."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bug.",
+      "reference": "In this case we probably meant \"package\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Just export `createFile` directly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This probably needs to get shipped with plz; you shouldn't have to redefine it within the user's repo. It should use `defaultPath` like the other things up the top of the file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((())))))((((((())))))))))(((((((())))",
+      "reference": "interface for bitcoin should not change if possible. i.e: networks.testnet should return networks['btc'].testnet"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (from `gofmt`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the wlr_surface_send_frame_done function.",
+      "reference": "We have this functions in a couple of places. It should probably live in util or something."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR. I don't think we should do this in a separate PR, but I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "maybe this should be inside the destroy?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Do not import torch in the test function because it will import torch every test iteration and will slow down the testing speed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think we want to return an error here, not nil."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a description here.",
+      "reference": "Nitpicking, but I think it would be more accurate to use an actually supported value, i.e. `completed`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this in the `JobApiHelper` class. I don't think this is the right place to put it in the `JobApiHelper` class.",
+      "reference": "How about renaming the `ApiJob` class to `JobApi`. As per rails convention, get method is to get a single object, not a collection, can we change that to `fetch`/`where`. It would be great if we can move the `get` method to a class method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to addActionEnvelopeValidators here.",
+      "reference": "assignments should only be cuddled with other assignments (from `wsl`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`k` is unused in PutHash"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "None of the child return null here, plus it was creating an incoherence between interfaces."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "this is not a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug, it is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Should we remove this entirely now then?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "That is way too generic a name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to test for overwrote ids. I don't think we should test for overwrote ids, but I don't think we should test for overwrote ids.",
+      "reference": "This might be overkill for test code...but as stewards of accessibility it would be appropriate to have a label in the fixture."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate test.",
+      "reference": "Are these allocations necessary, or can these be instantiated normally (i.e., `VkCommandBufferObj secondary_full_clear(...)`). If the allocations _are_ necessar, I'd vote for using something like `std::unique_ptr` and then remove the associated `delete`s."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "es.clear should call this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this test in a separate test.",
+      "reference": "please remove. this is true by the definition of the Python language"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Hmm, I wonder if binding `` is a good idea... this means it wouldn't be passed to webpages anymore, which makes me wonder how many people rely on that... I guess trying it is the only way to find out :wink:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Golang naming convention is to use camel case `icmpPktWithTypeCode` Often the linter will complain"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "nit: Probably should renamed to `InitializeBody`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "is `settings.icon` always null/undefined when there's no icon or does is it get set to a blank string? It might be worth wrapping it in an `isBlank()` anyway"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "put invoke to the end of the list, and other module at beginning of the list (line 86)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `%.2f megabytes`",
+      "reference": "I think that bytes is too precise. Can we just calculate the approximate value in appropriate units? Something like MB, GB depending on the value, `db capacity: 5000000 chunks (approximately 20GB)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "This check shouldn't look at the content, you're already doing this with `none-empty-text`. I also think this check should be renamed to `none-empty-alt` or something like it. There is nothing specific to applets in this check to warrant putting `applet` in the check ID."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove the `$this->taxEngine = $options[\"tax_engine\"];` from the `TaxCreationForm` class.",
+      "reference": "Why did you change the signature of this method? You can break BC doing that"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "can you catch the error here please and return err if it can't read the template"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Is this method called at another location too? I'm just asking because you didn't remove another call to `updateLibrary`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Not necessary but you should be able to add a `?` on `is_default?` and `published?`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "here is us decoding directly the bytebuffer in benchmarks"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "When the Tracer is first created AND `DD_LOGS_INJECTION=true`, this is invoked and causes the issues described."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "NIT: If we are renaming the JsonRpcError, should we also rename this enum value to be consistent?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This could be made into a function expression, yes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think abort() is needed.",
+      "reference": "Oops, I missed this initially."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we add an assertion here the policy actually contains both statements created above?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "a space after comma?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "nit formatting here and below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think that there is a general consensus of trying to avoid this kind of mocks in the new tests that we write. I would suggest to have tests using fake service implementations. In this case, we can have a fake entry service. Examples of how tests have been written this way are the tests for the `spire-server agent` and `spire-server bundle` commands. It would be great if we can have that kind of testing here also. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in RunQuery"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be codechecker_common.Report",
+      "reference": "Couldn't we use type hints to express this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "why you do `.classList.add()` here but `.replace()` in other places?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What is this sleep here for?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think that this test doesn't cover this bug correctly. When I attached the older version of the handsontable to this test it passes, should fail. Can you check that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe this should just be passed in on construction time"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `wlr_error(WLR_ERROR, \"Failed to open any DRM device\");`",
+      "reference": "We should create the monitor after the `if (!primary_drm)` check."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can be removed now that slots are used"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The description should match the test"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "rootston needs to unset this now"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "why do you rename this function?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "since we are no longer using these numbered icons can we remove them from source control?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "both edge and normal need to set this, so set it to be default action?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think that's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is doing a straight string compare of the files the right way to determine this? I guess if you expect to be the only one writing this file it could work but it does seem like it might be a large string compare and if we are doing this hundreds of times that might cause some memory issues."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error",
+      "reference": "What's the purpose of this change? It basically changes nothing until we want to put smth between curly braces"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Hmm, why is this needed? `wlr_input_device_destroy` should destroy the tablet tool."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think it's better to throw `UnsupportedOperationException`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "`props.children` is not always guaranteed to be an array. When only one child is passed this will break. We can use `toChildArray()` to turn it into an array :tada:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please just remove this line. We have the git history if we want the old version."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "@kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk",
+      "reference": "Can we put some of the code on a new line to make it more readable. The max line length was 120 now, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove the handling here as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do we want to make this configurable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception.",
+      "reference": "Prefer adding a second `positive(String, double)` that delegates down to this three-param version. Using `null` in code is generally Not A Great Idea, and it looks ugly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Is this going to break things for 18F proposals, or will these fields just be ignored?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Keys.COMMAND seems to be an alias to Keys.META. That isn't mentioned?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What's the reason for moving this to config from status?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not return True if we don't want to return False.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't we re validate/update the in memory suppress data here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about fixing this.",
+      "reference": "curious why the renumbering is required here and elsewhere?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "s/must specify secrets/must specify secrets or Role info/"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "let's leave this as a dev-only feature, and copy prod db to local env when needed. that keeps blazer security issues to a minimum."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name of this class.",
+      "reference": "We'll be renaming ActivitySampler to Sampler anyway, so this change will be non-required. Prefer to avoid changes here to avoid merge conflict with my PR doing the rename."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This applies only in the \"set\" headers case, but what about \"adding\" a header (field prefixed with `+`)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure we should deprecate this. I kinda like the idea, that we would provide all exceptions (if we throw any) with a common super type. Of course, the exception should be not a checked exception like this one, but rather a runtime exception. We maybe need additionally an internal exception that we would convert into such a public API exception. But that's out of scope of this PR - that's the question of exception handling."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `MarkNotSetError(Exception)`.",
+      "reference": "You'll need to adjust the docstring :wink:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Add a TODO explaining why this is being done"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "This file still uses Blockly.VariableModel..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Small nit, in the PR description its `publicAccess` but here its `public`. Guessing the preferred naming is public?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Maybe `driver.Watcher` -> provider (2x)? This is the concrete type, this user doesn't really know anything about the driver."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "can we remove this since `getDocValues` already returns an iterator? (we might need to do `T extends DocIdSetIterator` above)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Don't check this in. This is already implemented in core_extensions/ruby/string.rb"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is used for both `id`, and `hash` we may not want these both to be enumerable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a duplicate.",
+      "reference": "Is this necessary? I would expect YARD to treat it as public anyway... (Don't hold off merging on this...I'm mostly just curious)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@wxing1292 to double check this is the right version to use?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't there be another case for when both min and max are specified?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this file should be renamed to CERN.",
+      "reference": "Don't miss this one `2: I102 copyright year is outdated, expected 2014 but got 2013`. Thanks"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "the tail_ maybe nullptr?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "The PR description mentions that `The controller code is extended to react to \"add\" events`, but I don't see any additional cases added here beyond the existing Create and Delete... is there something I'm missing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "Does it matter that #include changed to #include?? I think the change makes sense since it aligns with the method name on Hash but unsure if anything called #include that would break with the change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend]))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "LGTM, curious though why exactly this is in place, and are there any possible issues from not waiting long enough?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "?: is unnecessary because we already force preserve_hosts to be a string with to_s."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "should it be `newsessionqueue` or `newsessionqueuer`? In case we'd like to be consistent"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Since lazy is re-rendered when mounting the fallback, these checks get triggered an additional time."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.",
+      "reference": "There is a `is_content_editable()` method just above this, what's the difference?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be deprecated.",
+      "reference": "Hmm, I'm not sure this is exactly what we want to get across. The behavior of leaving both values unset allowing the entire config to be managed is what is indeed deprecated. It's just that not the entire field is deprecated, just that one behavior."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be in a separate function, not in a separate function.",
+      "reference": "Given the slightly vague discussion in basename(3) about POSIX basename (modifies arg) vs GNU (doesn't), I always assumed it was advisable to pass a string copy However, I guess you'd get a \"discarding const\" warning promoted to error by our build system here if you were getting the POSIX implementation. Hah! Cool, I probably can go remove some memory copies in other parts of the code where those conditions exist."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Do you know somehow that this was the culprit? Even 1 minute is a lot, so I would expect the bug to lie somewhere else."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "what to do if some failed? just logging?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "since these thoughts are all Jack Handey's the generator should probably be called `jack_handey` to reflect that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this file is autogenerated. you should edit `model/api/api-2.json` and then go generate this file. otherwise the next people generating api.go will remove the changes you added here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Extra empty line detected at class body beginning."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.",
+      "reference": "This is smart but hacky! I would probably prefer an alternate solution that would be more obvious to read/understand."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "i would not return a pointer for status here which is an int"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AuthalicMatrixCoefficients` list.",
+      "reference": "Those functions are not currently wrapped, so I don't think it is necessary to exclude them (at least for now)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should we specify the name of the folder?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "it's not wrong, but you don't technical need `rdmolops` here since it's imported as part of `Chem`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should wait() here.",
+      "reference": "I think the absence of this might have been the cause of the dump file corruption. We didn't wait for the pxz command to exit, leading to a race condition between the cp and this, leading to corrupted files in some places. I came across this because the hashes created and printed were different from the hashes of the actual files in dev also."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "Out of the scope."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe `sortByColumnHeader` would be more precise? The plugin has a method with the same name and it could be confusing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "@developit I vaguely remember you mentioning something about some JS engines having an escape analysis feature that makes objects (and arrays?) locally declared that never leave the function essentially free from a GC perspective or something. Do you think we could benefit from that here? Or should we leave this as it is?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Remind me why this is needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Query` class.",
+      "reference": "same as above, can this be null now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This doesn't make sense to me. Should `cv.lengths` be an integer array instead of longs? It looks like they should always be integers since the values are assigned from `ArrayData#numElements()`. That's very likely an int."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should use `String.IndexOf(str, \"Q1=\"))`",
+      "reference": "str.Substring(3).Split(' ')[0] would also work and is more concise."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Did you mean to negate the not_a_peer check?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this file.",
+      "reference": "Copyright (C) 2010-2021 DBeaver Corp and others"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This seems like an unrelated change"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Just to double-check -- are you sure this needs to be done *before* we create a new session? (Is `SetKeyLabel` setting what the label will be for all future keys or the label for the current key?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `SharedMemTransportDescriptor` class. I think we should move this to the `SharedMemTransportDescriptor` class.",
+      "reference": "I thought we were removing the FAIL policy altogether...."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could you elaborate on why you made this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a test, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "before the fix, does this sentence make service crash? My point is can you re-produce the problem. I'm not sure the bug is due to non-asiic code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This comparison looks a bit strange, we should first check existence of key \"IsApiToken\" and then check if it is equal to true. ~~Besdies, s/IsApiToken/IsAuthedByToken/~~"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to do this in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do it in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we don't have to do.",
+      "reference": "This might be working as is, but I'm a bit thrown by the || and then && and how things get evaluated. Testing real quick on the go playground, true || false && false seems to either evaluate the && first, or start on the right side. Anyhow could you group with braces, it looks to me like it should be ( a || b) && c in this case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "add an entry in makefile to generate binary with diff name?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "hmm so we didn't validate the HTTP config for all receivers?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test. I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "ITextFormatActivity had this, can I add to have the same effect?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `apierrors` file.",
+      "reference": "not blocking: can we remove extra lines here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This just feels weird... can we use some kind of constant here? something like: `if (_.isUndefined(data) || data === PrivateKey.Random)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "if does not have a class I guess the exception should be thrown because we cannot recognize the type based on it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "LOL: use your GitHub username?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "any tests for nextPrefix()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "In general I'm saying \"if there is no common type I'm just going to skip some stuff and fail silently.\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "did we move the eventing logging here? Probably the eventing logging was removing and they are now using the pkg logging in eventing. If that is the case, we should do the same here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think that `Handler` should preserve the `operation` member and the span formatter should receive the operation name string as a parameter too, otherwise the `operation` parameter in the `NewHandler` function becomes useless if we pass a custom span formatter. Also, shouldn't it be called `spanNameFormatter`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you merge #466? That would make the current `None` default value working and more relevant that `\"127.0.0.1\"`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "is reserved filed name the only possible reason this could fail?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to true.",
+      "reference": "Would a KBFS_DISABLE_JOURNAL make more sense?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.",
+      "reference": "BTW. What's the message meaning?..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "this should say false"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "for my understanding - are this line and the next line both necessary? they seem to contain duplicate information. same for the other test files"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `get_search_url` function.",
+      "reference": "No need for the `.keys()`, iterating over a dictionary gives you its keys (and thus you can also do `key in some_dict`). With that, it also fits on one line :wink:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "If we want to avoid the user calling constructor and destructor, we should add `= delete` to their declarations. If we just want to avoid writing the default behavior, we should add `= default` to the declarations. I'm more in favor of the second option to avoid an API break."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "My preference here is to keep a stricter hierarchy. We should have a mixin or something that is an AssetEvent that Observation and Materialization can both inherit from. That way we can check the type in the frontend if we need to."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can also cast them as `set`s and compare them."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Still TODO I guess?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Another cleanup. There are two additional `using namespace std::chrono;` under this one. Should also remove std::chrono:: from the full file. Please do this on a single commit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Looking at this list of boolean flags I wonder if we should create enums for all of these options, so that the code becomes much more readable"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Is this necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "How about this NS inside query NS?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this.",
+      "reference": "in line 79, sm also can be stateReader"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "maybe can not return a map directly, it will be modified by inner thread."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.",
+      "reference": "What is the actual change here, why is this test change needed? Now the diff will send back more data?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Might be better to use a tag here. I for one have used 1000 isotopes as a tag in the past..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This tests seems it was broken from the start :joy:. It \"worked\" because the old sample chance was small enough that this have always be off. Thanks for fixing this. Could you also change the strings on this test? `\"Recording off\"` and `\"new span is recording events\"`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is not actually the case, you need to modify `toConfiguration` below to prevent a configuration from being produced"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning.",
+      "reference": "I'm worried about we hide some important log here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Python 3 will throw an exception for inf, but not providing a timeout will result in no timeout exception."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "As this method changes the state, it should be `POST`. Also, maybe to rename it to `createTag`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in rollbackTraffic"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Roslyn conventions have const in PascalCase."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is not bullet proof if e.g. user has `clientPort=1234` in `zoo.cfg` and in zkHost connection string. Then we'll add a warning that dynamic config differs from zkHost, which is not entirely true since we just lack the port part. We have no way from client to read the `clientPort` from server except from connecting to the server with 4LW *ont the clientPort* which is a chicken and egg. This hack will make the comparison work for default port, which is a compromise."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We can probably delete this entire file. It's not used now and we'll (probably) write a custom serializer before we ever switch to MessagePack 2.1."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Aren't you duplicating this option?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure we should be doing this based on the extension? Calling them `.build_defs` is just a convention"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Should remove in `_MissingPandasLikeMultiIndex:` too"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `awsLoadBalancerSpec` struct.",
+      "reference": "We should scope this down to the bits that we're actually using, otherwise the API is going to be problematic, as it includes references to NAT gateways and public and/or private subnets. Copying the types to be more local to the task in hand is fine."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.aws.",
+      "reference": "Is it is a hard requirement for this field to be 'cn-northwest-1' when wanting to interact with AWS China? It appears that putting in 'cn-north-1' would also result in using the alternative API endpoint (with the region overridden to use 'cn-northwest-1' for the created AWS client)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "Stephen already fixed this one. Only the OverSize test is flaky now right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `mailer.proposal_link_text` method.",
+      "reference": "if the `activity_mailer` has a layout, should we include the footer in that? Realize there may also be conflicts with work @rememberlenny is working on..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This makes me nervous, mostly because I don't know very much about it. Will users run into the gettext error in the wild? I can't reproduce it locally, but it's hard to be 100% sure. Is disabling gettext in Pal an option?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is Java smart enough to know the generic type here? Never knew this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "no thought given to reload"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Please, don't remove the `getDisabledMetricAttributes` method. All changes must be backward-compatible."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this left over from debugging?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I've fallen for this before myself :) We _do_ call `close` inside of `done` on L65"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "That looks fine! You could use `\"rclone/\"+fs.Version` too if you wanted. BTW does tardigrade use http under the hood? If you were using rclone's http Client then you'd get a User-Agent and you'd also get support for `-vv --dump bodies` and other nice things."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This will cause the neg_prob.log() to be inf without clamp. This will cause the neg_prob.log() to be inf without clamp.",
+      "reference": "Adding one line `prob = prob.clamp(min=EPS, max=1-EPS)` already works."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "another option would be to create a `CreateRequestQueue(bool lockingQeueue)`, and set it only in `InitializeTarget`, isn't? The would prefer having the creation and \"business\" rules for the creation in one region, I think `InitializeTarget` would be the best place."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Wait, I think the `subsurface_handle_place_above` code was correct before. `place_above` means \"place it above in rendering order\" right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.",
+      "reference": "why did this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Do you think we should have some tests here for `tlf.SingleTeam` too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "No problem with this but might as well revert this file since nothing else changed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "In my changes, I did not create a new `AspNetScopeManager`. I'm not familiar with it enough to know if this is a valid change or not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Not cool with this. I think we talked about it in past. This is a side effect. If we want to introduce the side effect in our functions like `inRange` (which I am for) the side effect (error) should originate in that function and not in some internal `throwError` function. Every stacktract will start at line `2` of `trowError.js`. Been there, done that and falled back to throwing the error from the place where it should be thrown."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We don't need this additional method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new test for this.",
+      "reference": "The purpose of this test is to ensure that the `OAuth2UserRequest` passed into `loadUser` is **not** null else throw `IllegalArgumentException`. Changing the `List` of `OAuth2UserService` mocks to `DefaultOAuth2UserService` doesn't really apply to what is being tested here. Please revert this. Thank you."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: rename to nativeStk? proto might lead to think protobuf"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `Shards` and rename it to `SHARDS_ROWS` or `SHARDS_ROWS`",
+      "reference": "Why not `queryUUID` (and reference the same constant as in other places)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.",
+      "reference": "This is also used to log, of which our convention is leading uppercase..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `assertPandasEqual` instead of a `assertPandasEqual`.",
+      "reference": "What about we just name it `check_exact`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "before, a binary annotation had the same service name as a regular annotation, masking the bug where we weren't querying the latter"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.",
+      "reference": "Where does the `7` come from?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I don't know how we haven't got bugs from some of these! As here this would have had a stale `value`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "One nit here I forgot about this before but we usually structure error messages as \"Cannot X because Y. Then the recommendation goes here\" I would also recommend not using \"it\" in the message since it the pronoun is a bit ambiguous. \"to specify write sort-order\" may be clearer"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "I'm surprised this worked at all! It was importing the default export but `eslint-plugin-import` warned me `warning Using exported name 'initialState' as identifier for default export import/no-named-as-default`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in this PR.",
+      "reference": "This was used in `app/views/video_tutorials/_video_tutorial_details.html.erb` how are we handling that now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the error message.",
+      "reference": "Is `\\S+` really the right thing? Anybody know what kind of encoding this is? Perhaps if we know it doesn't have commas, we can just use `[^,]+`. Also, parens around the comma are unnecessary, since we're not using the capture group."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.",
+      "reference": "This block of changes looks like you removed tests without replacing them anywhere. Did I miss something?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "n.b. private and computed values are now exposed to the API. They were hidden/not exposed before."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove target from link.",
+      "reference": "Nitpick: Please add a period after `link` :wink:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "we got no chance that `err` is not nil here, need to revisit how `NewUpstreamController` is defined."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "Instead of building in routing for a browser-specific command, could you refactor the HttpCommandExecutor to allow arbitrary commands to be registered?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "It'd be nice to assert the right deprecation is being raised, just add a third argument of `/\"its\" method/`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move the location provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider provider",
+      "reference": "Do we want to add this to the docs?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `assert.Equal(tb, code, st.Code(), \"GRPC status code does not match\")`",
+      "reference": "This isn't really related but makes debugging test failures much easier since you see the string representation of the code instead of the integer value."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Because of this new early exit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe call it `WireBridge`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "can this be removed now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the file from pmix_server_module_t.",
+      "reference": "This is going to create a problem - we are already encountering issues with the length of the usock pathname on recent Linux kernels as the temp directory base has moved down to the var directory under a name created by a hash. So adding another field to it is going to add to the problem."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "What do you think about moving this to the `cloudformation` pkg?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please make this private by default"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We can add `@Override` annotations to all of the implementations of this method. I think this is a best practice for us, but it would be nicer in any case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Most of uses of `RefreshAndGet` seems to be made only for `Refresh` part, result is ignored. We can simplify this method to assigning single responsibility to it - just `Refresh()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `OptionConflictError`",
+      "reference": "@Pierre-Sassoulas Are we sure this doesn't create problems? Without it for some reason we get an error on `accept-no-param-docs` being a duplicate error. I couldn't figure out why it did this. This solves the issue and passes the tests, but I wonder if this creates other issues.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does it make sense to check for \"Created\" here as well? Or should it return an error in such case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Did you mean to use `identifier.toString` here as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": "interesting! didn't realize this was needed in RSpec 3"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.",
+      "reference": "This is to avoid circular reference"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to False.",
+      "reference": "As the bokeh renderer also has a ``load_nb`` classmethod (and notebooks are explicitly mentioned in that method name), I would consider making ``_notebook`` into a constant ``notebook_context`` class parameter. The docstring can say it is set to True if the ``load_nb`` classmethod has been called."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Where is the actual command generated here? Shouldn't this be taking in `constructor(db, collectionName, options)` and then constructing the command off of that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Mirror the `OPTIONAL OUT` of fullpath"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should update ConsensusCurrentVersion when a specific version is not provided.",
+      "reference": "Please merge with master and replace with with \"future\" version."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Nit: Change is not needed for this PR :slightly_smiling_face:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I think it would be better to use `self.vcap_data['application_uris'].min_by(&:length)` instead of `self.vcap_data['application_uris'].min_by(&:length)`",
+      "reference": "if we are returning `nil` from an `else` I think we can just remove the `else` (and this method will still return `nil`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "side note: this change is ok as of today because we have not exported the results for this new type to BenchView yet. After we to that the namespace, type name and method name should not be changed (they create a benchmark ID which is used in BenchView)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))(((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2)",
+      "reference": "How exactly are you expecting the user to see issues with their Midas library? It seems like all error information is being swallowed and not clearly reported to the user. Even if the eventual result is to report that loading the file failed, it seems like the exception, in this case, might have more information about why."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Looks good, but seems `ReadMessage` hadn't used this Deadline in Underlying `WSConnection`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the file size.",
+      "reference": "Make it \"___*\" three underscores to make it even less likely to have a collision? I assume it will be hard to change the file name once this change is deployed..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to retry for some problems?",
+      "reference": "We don't need this anymore after #2151"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this is this removed? I don't understand in the context of this PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`isinstance(ip6, Net6)` instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do we really need the param here? If only partial results returned, we could return ResultCode::PARTIAL_RESULTS;"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this logic seems duplicated from the other new function. I think it should probably be a member function on `BuildTarget`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "size reduce to 1/4 of using Gob"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "The Hash interface states that a call to `Write()` never returns an error. Does this also apply to the number of written bytes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "In my tests, I found that `[[ \"\" -lt 12 ]]` evaluates to true, but `[[ -lt 12 ]]` is an error, which is why the subshell is wrapped in `\"`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this trait is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I don't see a validation on `published_on`, we generally shouldn't specify it in the base factory unless the model would be invalid without the model. Is there a different way we can handle this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "maybe add a `isExhaustive()` method on the enum to avoid these large conditions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "so those regexps were wrong previously? e.g. they would match `/v\\/foo`? If so, raise a bug and fix on the 1.0 branch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think with MultiBackend we could have a slightly different logic: return true if there are no configured login targets ( = getLoginDrivers returns an empty array). MultiBackend could also check all configured login targets for loginIsHidden support and verify that at least one of the configured login targets allows login, but I wouldn't go that far without a use case. In a related note, I'm not quite sure if loginIsHidden works with ChoiceAuth at all, but that's a different issue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Should we add error info for not supporting the compressed binary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to get the cluster region.",
+      "reference": "I suggest injecting this into the reconciler. For this and the others. Have Wire generate it and push it into the controller creation."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Can't we just make _serializer static? We use same settings every time. I would also put those fields on top of the class for readability."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "Can't we just use `metadata['websocket_flow']` to identify handshake flows and not add another attribute?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Funny that we were wrapping this with string interpolation before..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to export the model from the controller.",
+      "reference": "I had an eslint error saying I must \"alias\" my model - so I copied this from controllers/site.js"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "unsure if the methodname can still be `GetMetricPoints()` as before..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This file contains the functional changes, the rest is for testing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I know you didn't do this, but there's no need for the `nethttp` alias and it was confusing to me - just remove it and s/nethttp/http/ everywhere (it's fine that the package here is http itself, I do the same thing in transport/grpc)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "I felt that this was the most non-invasive way to fix the test, but this does expose some raw DB queries and knowledge about how SQLite works which may be a code smell. The alternative to getting this to pass is to perform enough writes to trigger a checkpoint, but that threshold is determined in the config stage and this test may not be able to know what that page threshold is set to. This could lead to inconsistent test runs which is why I elected to force the checkpoint regardless of the page threshold."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is new model format backward compatible with current v2?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should we perhaps write a spec that ensures we don't send a welcome email to a user on login when the user is not new?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think my preference would be to have the type be a `time.Duration` and use `time.ParseDuration` for parsing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "JMX offers normal APIs for this. I don't think you want the glassfish one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "We should really leave a TODO or something or else we will forget them..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This exposes what a bad name `dagster_type` was, but is it crazy to want this to just be `type` -- do we gain usability by being super-explicit that this is a `runtime_type`? If so, would it make sense to rename the `config_field` to be `config_type`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `_get_isSelectionAnchoredAtStart` method.",
+      "reference": "It might help here if you give a brief explanation of what you mean with a selection being anchored at the start."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "move cachedStates to handle function"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `privacyMode` or `privacyMode`",
+      "reference": "I don't think this can just be renamed; it's saying that privacyMode is a BooleanSetting, which it's not."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "what was the reason for this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "Minor, but these two nullable and the logic around them could be replaced by a Lazy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `go-checkpoint.go` file.",
+      "reference": "I think I would just pass in `len(peers)`, on the principle of minimum information."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Spark's default value is 10 but it also rewrites IN as OR/EQUALS. We can do better that this because of the way we evaluate IN predicates. On datasets we tested this, we saw performance improvements on IN predicates with up to 200 elements (on sorted column). We may increase the default value a bit but I am very reluctant to make it more than 300 since our jobs were 20% slower with IN predicates that contained 300 elements. That being said, the optimal value still depends on a particular query and table."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a new feature.",
+      "reference": "Please update copyright year."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Same here, could just be `std::setprecision`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not in test mode?",
+      "reference": "Do we still want the \"admins\" gate?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "nit: `it is assumed`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I would appreciate it if you could refrain from using `stdbool.h`. We allow the header files of H2O to be included from C++ (which means that `bool` might be a C++ type), and therefore my preference is to not use `bool` in our code (but instead use `int` or `char` for the purpose) to avoid confusion."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "@danielbidala What happens if `searchScope` is not defined in `config_relation.yaml`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Do we want maybe a 1min timeout?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I guess code never reaches this line, you can remove `else` block and just `return a[0], a[1]`. Also, probably rename `a` to `auth` as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Doesn't this no-arg constructor need to be public for serialization to work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),((((((((((((),),),),),),),),),(((((((())),),),((((())),),),),(((())),),((())",
+      "reference": "Just use the word \"veld\" instead of \"gebied\" here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((()))))))((((((()))))))(((((((()))))))((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This change (import org.shredzone.flatter4j.model.User;) does not seem relevant to this fix / commit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a flag.",
+      "reference": "This should be a Bool() rather than a String(). (See the other PR for an example)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the test to check that the rule_book.resource_rules_map is not empty.",
+      "reference": "This should be a failure if we don't get the exact number of expected rules. You can use a constant if you don't want to update several lines any time you update the test rule strings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "We need to switch from BeamSync to FullSync when we download all the needed headers, blocks, receipts and state"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why you duplicate it? The underlaying transport should live as long as the multiplexed one. And must be destroyed after protocol is destroyed. Duplicating the transport may lead to object references hold and maybe memory freeing problems. I think this property must hold a reference to it and not a copy. The copy can lead to memory freeing problems."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "`in.Status.Experiment.Phase`. we can omit `ChaosStatus`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Just curious... why the alias here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Seems like this should conflict with changes I made during merging of the 20.2 RESX file translation"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why disable this rule?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think you don't need the `... if '{}' in arg else arg` part - if the arg doesn't contain `{}`, `arg.replace('{}',...)` will return the unchanged string anyways."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: Should we make this an attribute of the LoadGroupMembersPIpeline class?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "need to update this command to use the name field instead of principal_id"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "nit: I can't help but think the privateTransactionHandler should be a base-class member... every Priv Json RPC seems to need it..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Why does this start the main activity and not the preferences? With `overridePendingTransition(0, 0)`, this could instantly switch the theme without the user being disrupted"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.",
+      "reference": "Prefer a human-readable string rather than querying specific technologies. How would I indicate a session is running on BrowserStack? Or some custom thing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "It appears as though whoever checked in python changes didn't re-run regenerate:expected. I am modifying these files as a result of running that after a sync and build."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "This was copied from JavaMethodViewGenerator; only the `public static` method modifiers were added."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this is going to throw for frontier transactions post-london"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to log the error.",
+      "reference": "The catch clause is not needed. The finally clause alone is enough."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.",
+      "reference": "Prefer a human-readable string rather than querying specific technologies. How would I indicate a session is running on BrowserStack? Or some custom thing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Changing the default value for isClosed from TRUE to FALSE can have other repercussions. We might miss throwing error. Can you please confirm this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the task to the task handler. I don't think we should add the task to the task handler. I don't think we should add the task to the task handler.",
+      "reference": "Please use more meaningful names than `te`here and in other places."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps this would be more idiomatic as `ConfigFor(interface{}) (*PluginConfig, bool)`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: We could import `APPLICATION_AMZ_JSON_1_1` from `constants.py` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `MvvmCrossAsyncDispatcher` instead of `MvvmCrossAsyncDispatcher`",
+      "reference": "Should this not inherit from IMvxMainThreadDispatcher?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "line is 167 characters (from `lll`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: consider adding a blank line between L15 and L16."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "This is another bug fix: Without skipping the bytes of the vector this would read garbage data."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "why need this? i don't see Gen.CreatorPubKey being used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "As previously mentioned, best to drop this locale override. It's not something we only provide in exceptional circumstances. Moreover, it doesn't work for this PR anyway, while massively increasing the code complexity!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the template.",
+      "reference": "is this supposed to be `Desired`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "The iterator is not wrapped when the score mode is set to `COMPLETE_NO_SCORES` so you don't need to change this assertion anymore?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there too much spaces there? (should be 4 I think)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "IS_FIRST_PULL revision is better to use instance property, not static. When KieClient has only one instance, instance property is better. When KieClient has many instances(not possible), static is not good eitheir."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This needs to be removed since we removed the mixin."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the weight in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Can `weight_` be deleted?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This is fine, but by Symfony convention this part is responsability of the compiler pass class, i.e `DependencyInjection\\Compiler\\?`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The host object already has a nice way of querying configprint. Try `puppet('master')['user']`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Let's call this `share` and not `upload` - the user wants to share their flows, uploading is just the implementation of that. :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "It would be better to keep focus on the main text control. But to get around the fact that Dialogs focus their first child on show, even when not active, something like Dialog.isActive should be chcked when appending text, rather than whether the text control has focus."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "So is this invoked every time we extend the trace?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Why not use switch here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "I think `NoAuth` is a better name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "This does create a minor bifurcation in how closing the InputWriter is done in success vs failure cases. Is there anyway to merge this with the success exit path? This is something that seems like it would be better as a function closure instead of method on the `$esapi.Name` type. Can the `es.Close` not be used instead of this method?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please keep this blank line. PEP8 says: > Method definitions inside a class are surrounded by a single blank line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "You are not passing in a `:params` key here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Probably change \"ovs\" to \"OVS\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `$this->getRequest()->get('uniqueId')`",
+      "reference": "Please linebreak this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this?",
+      "reference": "`= default` is implied here, so having it is redundant. Is it a stylistic choice to include it, or just an oversight?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this interface.",
+      "reference": "Maybe it's time to fix the param name for this interface?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Why are we removing it? Looks like useful info. Obviously, field names should change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the logging.config file.",
+      "reference": "Missing fallback to MessageTemplates.ValueFormatter.Instance"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The parameter in the docstring should be fixed too. Actually, why don't you try to implement the other axis? It wouldn't be impossible to do if we use pandas UDF from a cursory look. We have enough time before the next release currently."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `cloud.google.com/go/compute/metadata`",
+      "reference": "This also runs a patch if its in the middle of one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to debug this task?",
+      "reference": "Could we rename this method to `updateKnownStatus`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should set the origin tag to the root span of each trace/subtrace. I don't think we should set the origin tag to the root span of each trace/subtrace.",
+      "reference": "Maybe it would make sense to move that to DecorateRootSpan? Currently it only has Azure stuff, but given the name of the method I feel like it would be semantically appropriate"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `coreapi` file. I don't think we should add this to the `coreapi` file.",
+      "reference": "nit: these imports were in a separate group to ones from this repo"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Is it possible to rename the methods to `isXXXMethod` to keep the usage by the caller generic? The caller could use the result of these methods to verify whether a feature is enabled or to validate an input value for example."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Don't penalize everyone with 250ms delay b/c some machines have problems."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This try-catch should be here so that watcher thread doesn't just exit in case of an exception. This change alone would probably be enough to fix the error as well, assuming that there's another `ENTRY_MODIFY` event when the file write is finalized. But of course not a perfect fix because it doesn't protect against possibly reading a non-empty but only partially written file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Weird that we have to check for `s == nil` here.. I would instead have fixed the call stack to find out when this gets invoked with a nil server."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it. I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "The `import` statement for `Ember` is missing in this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Awesome :tada: I'd love to have a test case for this so that we don't regress on this feature in any future refactorings :+1:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "For testing some of the rounding functions"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "This should be present in UPGRADE notes. Also on currently running projects you should suggest users to update these settings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Are you sure you want to do this? This will affect the working set block cache too, such that it'll now be tracking global free space. It throws off the fraction calculation."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))(((())))((((()))))((((((()))))(((((())))))(((((()))))(((((())))))((((((()))))((((((())))((((((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why would the read access need to be mutexed? The caller might still get a wrong answer since the value might change immediately after the mutex is unlocked before the caller receives the value."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "This fits on one line without the parentheses :wink:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "Looks like `TestCloudRecovery` changes are unrelated?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Doctrine\\DBALException?",
+      "reference": "Try to separate it to different methods. Invoke is huge :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Looks like another spot that would benefit from `truncate`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This change is not related to what this PR wanted to fix, but undefined behavior sanitizer warns without this parenthesis because `h2o__tokens + i` overflows."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to check for `no_docstring_rgx` and `no_docstring_rgx.pattern`.",
+      "reference": "This is actually incorrect and should be the other way around. Going to fix this tomorrow. If `no_docstring_rgx == re.compile(\"\")` no function should be checked, since every function matches the pattern. If `no_docstring_rgx == re.compile(\"^$\")` all functions should be checked."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the scope here.",
+      "reference": "Should this be in a config file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "purely preference, but have you considered using parentheses to indicate that a method is being tested? e.g., `describe('eachAsync()')`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))(((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why not return success?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a bug?",
+      "reference": "Please use snake_case for properties to keep it consistent with the rest of the codebase."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "i don't understand why we need this change. what information is this providing when running in less than Debug loglevel? I prefer to revert this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to restore the clock.",
+      "reference": "Oh, so this test leaks DateTimeUtils offset? It would be safer to place the reset in an `@After` method to not cause side effects even if the test case fails."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Kind of a nit-pick, but is there no way to solve this while still not rendering an empty div if `footerText` is empty? We could still use the `Row` to maintain the same layout but then only render the `Cell` for the pagination - I think it's possible to use specific classes to horizontally offset?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this enum.",
+      "reference": "Template is also not an object type so I don't expect to notify on templates. Instead when applying templates, we'll be updating roles/policies/services/groups."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's a bug, but I think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Had to fix this to get my tests passing (should have been a new PR sorry)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this parameter is needed.",
+      "reference": "Small nit, and sorry for not spotting sooner.. this should have `omitempty` on it, else when marshalling nil values into json, it will be `caBundle: null` which trips up some JSON parsers"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting getting from getting from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from from",
+      "reference": "Would be good to say the normal behavior is scanline order (left to right, top to bottom) and that transposing makes it work top to bottom and left to right."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this flag is needed, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps note here that `--drive-use-created-date` takes precedence if both set?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should update_hyperparameters() instead.",
+      "reference": "Use EPS=1e-15 as that in atss_head or FCOS head."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Is there a need to replace the Index with a MasterIndex?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "are we adding stop state change in a different PR?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "How much difference is there between sort and sort_by?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))((((()))((((()))(((((()))(((((())))(((((((()))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "count doesn't seem to be used. Let's remove it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Mongo is a hard dependency for Mongoid. Why do we need an if-statement to if it's defined? We should always use Mongo::QueryCache"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table. I think we should add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Does this point out at a ROR funder id? If so, could we get rid of the `funder_name` field on the plan and just use the `name` of the funder with id `funder_id`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `MyGame` file.",
+      "reference": "Use!! to cast to bool, rather than the ternary bool antipattern."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "why is it in the list twice to begin with?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "This way you will **never** be kicked while monsters are around you."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This just fixes an unrelated prop type error, correct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This was a bug in KBFS-2071 -- oops."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `PaymentChannel` struct.",
+      "reference": "// Condition is a condition for... Condition"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Might be good to test that no emails were sent out, either. You should be able to use `deliveries` for this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "Right now this is experimental and deeply flaky. We left this at `info` to make debugging user reports a lot easier."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate file.",
+      "reference": "Is this new list being consumed yet?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "moved to `errors.go` which is the only places `math/rand` is used in this package"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\")\")#########################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "This use is wrong, corrent is: `Shopsys\\FrameworkBundle\\Component\\Environment` It is the same in classes below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a valid host.",
+      "reference": "This is not really needed, the line added in `GridNodeConfiguration.java` is what really fixes the `remoteHost` regression."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I think it's a good idea to move this to the `updateContainerMetadata` method.",
+      "reference": "For my understanding, why was this removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "the whole idea was to display information on the plugin directory in case it was missing - need to add if...else... and display the plugin dir if it is configured (non empty) but cannot be found"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line if password is not empty.",
+      "reference": "Can you please set this as an error on the password view, rather than a toast, just to make sure that it is kept consistent. Check out a couple of lines below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't we pass here a proposal too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `assert.raises(DagsterInvalidDefinitionError)`",
+      "reference": "im not a huge fan of exact text match in these tests, not sure what a good solution is that solves the same problem"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this should _not_ be in the api. all postage APIs have moved to the debugAPI"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Including both functions seems like overkill for this PR since only _is_internal_node is ever used. Keep them if you think they'll both be used in the future, but if not, the code will be easier to read if you collapse the logic into a single function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It seems that the two words mean the same thing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))((()))",
+      "reference": "Do we need to set lastLogTerm_ to committedLogTerm when `lastLogId_ < committedLogId_`, on line 286"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the test.",
+      "reference": "About ~7% memory usage increase on average, at most 512KB"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ResponseWriter` interface.",
+      "reference": "Was this too big of a pain to do now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why need to spend time for initializing of array? when will we rewrite the contents anyway? This can take a lot of time in some algorithms. Especially if the filling is in sequential mode."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this column.",
+      "reference": "Can this be `null:false, default: ''` to avoid the nil vs blank issue?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Had to add this to get macOS to work."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a temporary folder.",
+      "reference": "What is the usage of this class?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Could we keep the original signatures as well, so we do not have to rewrite the method calls everywhere and add `null, null`? I think this could greatly reduce the changes needed in this patch"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Ideally this error should not be swallowed (can do in the next PR)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Wait a minute... You're passing it as a POST parameter. There's no way that can work."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.",
+      "reference": "minor: to be consistent with other logs, either use \"cleaning up\" (preferred) or \"cleanup\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Adding the config changes to the consul config template `consul_config.py.ctmpl` would be helpful too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.",
+      "reference": "While we're at it should we add Department? See Dataverse Category: Add Department #2829"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Files should have an extra line at the end of them."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i( i( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "TODO: check whether this is needed or not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`ReadConfig` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This is duplicated with `+build!cgo`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should just be `.not_to raise_error` otherwise it potentially hides errors"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a function?",
+      "reference": "Line 175 needs to be indented so that it's under `sfun`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "It looks strange a bit. What is the reason?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "You can remove this line from the build file.",
+      "reference": "Is this one of those `LexicalPreservingPrinter` issues?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we also add the length of the slice here? Some like ` len %d`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "move this line together to after line 16, group internal packages together"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the migration.",
+      "reference": "How about using a reference(project_id) instead of project name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "@qqmyers this looks fine but have you seen any performance issue here? If so, we could right some helper method like doesExternalToolNeedDataset(externalTool). But if there's trivial performance impact, not worth it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\u201d\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Make this a member variable instead (move to header inside `class` and rename to `m_bUsingLocalPrefs`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(())((()))",
+      "reference": "Generally I'd say we should factor this out into something more extensible (check an array of potentially skipped tests, for examples), but since we're likely to remove this soon for scheduled work I think this is fine. What do you think @daprahamian?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why are we skipping these tests? they should be passing in HIP-Clang."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think a \"string\" in Scapy's spirit (if such a thing exists) is actually a `bytes` object in Python 3 (see `Str*Field`s). So maybe `RandString._fix()` should return a `bytes` object. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "This can be combined to 1 line, just tested, seems to work."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "what needs to happen if it is not present?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "`DeploymentConfig` is only for deployment configuration not Piped configuration so `ds.DeploymentConfig.PipedSpec` is always nil. Instead of that, you can have Piped config with `e.PipedConfig` because it is placing inside `executor.Input`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This line doesn't seem to be right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "this need to be moved up after getting policy.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'm curious - is there a way to test these?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table",
+      "reference": "This was broken before as the name of the metadata table started with its type, not catalog."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this. I'm not sure how we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Maybe remake `VersionAsString()` function, so that that we would have build info in all places"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This should probably say something other than SSL_peek?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this file should be renamed to Site Kit by Google, Copyright 2020 Google LLC",
+      "reference": "Nitpicking, but this should be capitalized since it's a product name :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need RawTransactions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (from `gofmt`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "should not be this lessThan15MinAgo?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Would it work if we changed the return type of 'RejectRequest*' methods to Exception and instead did `throw RejectRequest(...`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It is not a \"perfect\" test, but: webOS 1.2 emulator says `probably`. webOS 3 emulator says \\``. webOS 4 emulator says \\``. Why did you remove `options.supportsDts`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "This check should be after the HIP_INIT_API to ensure HIP tracing & lazy init works correctly. Also return should be wrapped in ihipLogStatus() so that logging works correctly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Can't use short array syntax for the 3.1 release branch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make pmix_output_verbose()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()",
+      "reference": "@rhc54 Is this intentional or for debug purposes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in the config.registry.statsd.timer.",
+      "reference": "Maybe it should be `plugins.history` here instead of `listeners.X`, since we use those for listeners configured via `.ini` files?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "Hmm, I also don't have a better idea here. As a small thing, could you make this `@team_page.present?` or similar to make the intent slightly more clear?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Without that check it would fail later (probably in the getDecryptingCipher method) but the error could be hard to make sense of."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `take_snapshot` method, but I don't think we need to do this in the `take_snapshot` method.",
+      "reference": "I don't think that this belongs in the host code. A host is pretty much unaware of what hypervisor is running it and I don't want them to be so coupled to their hypervisor."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I'm here to tell you that this doesn't make sense because of the way it works. `setuptools.setup()` installs this only for setup-time and then discards those. But the problem is that it will not pick up a newer version because the older version is already in runtime and module cannot substitute itself. The proper place for adding build deps nowadays is `pyproject.toml`->`[build-system]`->`requires'."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "fakeConnectionManager -> mockConnectionManager. We probably should not use the `fake` anymore."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Code style. Btw, it's weird Codacy didn't catch that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "no need in BigInt just m.Unwrap().Big().Bitlen() == 0"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I assume you want to change NetworkPolicy to use bundles in a separate PR later?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: We could parameterize the commit hash, as it's used in multiple places."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "move this above the \"Constants\" as this is 3rd party ones"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`assert not in`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need to emit a state change event. I think we should emit a state change event.",
+      "reference": "just curious, why was this modified?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'm curious why the table name is bound at compile time? Is it just to save the table create/drop overhead in a prepare-once-execute-many situation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "quick question, isn't ProcessJob used by all job types? Then why is JOB_ID not found?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "looks like you forgot to actually increase the version"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.",
+      "reference": "I think it might be helpful if we add `Default value: False.` on the end of the summary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "I think the check should be `config.sync.fullSynchronization === false` - otherwise this will get triggered even when full sync is `true`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "this blown my mind"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "this should be controller-container-status"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Sort import. You can use IDE's organize import feature."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line.",
+      "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should skip this test.",
+      "reference": "This PR is off to a rough start. :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "Actually, it looks like the entire `normalizeProxyConfiguration` function isn't needed anymore"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `if excluded_portal_link %>`",
+      "reference": "How about `unless current_path == carts_path`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.",
+      "reference": "You need to modify the copyrite aliases so it's done automatically."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should delete props.defaultValue if props.defaultValue is undefined.",
+      "reference": "Quick question: Is this true for all `onAnimation*` and all `onTransition*` events?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should sending an address into address error? Since the call isn't needed, and could be fixed easily."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "This is the wrong MDC; see MDCLoggingContext which imports `org.slf4j.MDC`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe we can clarify a bit what that means."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This entire method can be deleted; it isn't used and it isn't an override of Stream."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "We avoid static method imports. Can you call `MetadataTableUtils.createMetadataTableInstance` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "No need for this, as pylint already only turns things off for this function and it's needed for the entire function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/",
+      "reference": "I'm actually surprised this is valid Ruby. I thought you'd need either `delegate(...)` or `delegate \\...`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Why change this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe change it to `'Can't UPLOAD remote files when bundle: true is set'`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Do we need to drop the remaining items from the batch? Otherwise we might end up with a dead loop. Add @CodeBlanch for awareness."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Because power is now added during `submitPoSt` this is needed for setting power in the genesis block. Again let me know if this bootstrapping solution is flawed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "To be consistent, these should go at the top between `DateTimeZone::listIdentifiers` and `SQLite3::createFunction`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think we should avoid changing any lucene classes for the moment - fileModified() can probably stay where it is?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "GONE breaks formating of \":\". or is it fixed below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should deprecate all methods from ASTFormalParameter?",
+      "reference": "What do you mean with this? Won't the deprecation be inherited?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "line between \" and \" should be <80 chars."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "What will happen if neither `rvm` nor `ruby` is present in the.travis.yml?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@p-l- Hey it seems that this was len-4?!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is something I added which resolved a few large errors in the output, although not related to the refactor here I don't think."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to from to to to to to to to to to to to",
+      "reference": "i have removed this line because whenever a video is played in AntennaPod this line was making play button invisible"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this test into a separate test class.",
+      "reference": "remove temporary code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not change the header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header header",
+      "reference": "* Should be tagged `@Unstable` * Should be a default method, returning `null` * Also, perhaps `Optional` instead of just `Long`? Always empty when the BASEFEE isn't relevant? If so the default is `Optional.empty()`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Minor detail, but let's use the interpolated template string syntax instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "this line is so long, split it to multi lines."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Looks like this might be one of those \"promoted features\" where you can enable it by _either_ enabling the extension _or_ enabling the feature bit. If that is the case, I think this needs to be: `(device_extensions.vk_ext_scalar_block_layout == kEnabledByCreateinfo) || (enabled_features.core12.scalarBlockLayout == VK_TRUE)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why should we define it for v1? This is preserved only for backward compatibility, all further modifications must be done in the latest vX"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.",
+      "reference": "This is a definite improvement! Hardcoding nonzero is vastly better than hardcoding length. Even so, is there no way to determine the actual value of nonzero in a way that doesn't load the entire dataset?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "do we have a way to avoid the string concats, if there is no username/password in the Uri? if (uri has UsernameInfo) { do what is done in this PR. } else { existing behavior. }"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "do not print the payload since it might be corrupted, you can get the data with _debug.http.response_payload configuration property"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "maybe \"app init creates an copilot directory and a workspace file\"? since you validate for the file as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `Topic` model.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the Sabre\\Event.php file.",
+      "reference": "Nit: Could rename this file from SabreEvent.php now that it's not for Sabre"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed. I'm not sure if it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "I believe this `Stop` function _is_ called with deferred."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This entire clause should now be removed. It was only relevant if `accountID` couldn't be parsed from `clientID`, which is now no longer needed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ansible` file. I don't think that's a good idea, but I don't think that's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "FTR: Unlike commonly known practice, `latest` in Ansible docs corresponds to the stable version, not to the latest state of the main Git branch. Is this your intention? Just checking..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Why do we have || CharInfo::UnknownCharSet here? I do not see it it in neighbouring statements. This is just for my understanding."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "isn't `HttpWebRequest` an expensive key value?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "couldn't we run this query whether there are observations or not?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "This shouldn't be needed to change right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This seemed broken to me. Why would browserify only check the (previously `cdn`, now) `bundle` example? And even so, the path is incorrect here. Fixing this is unrelated so should not go into this PR I feel. But when we fix this in master, perhaps that solves the reload issues that you experienced @hedgerh?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is for.",
+      "reference": "Same question, do we have potential version-conflict crashing scenarios here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Definitely not required, but it would be better if you had a constexpr for `\"INPUT_DUMMY\"`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It seems ok. Because already created a file name at line 1815 and already checked if it is null or empty at line 1816. If file name is null, then already this line will not executed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Can all the BaseFeePerGas methods that are added be removed? It's not needed for the bomb and not referenced anywhere else in this PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this warning.",
+      "reference": "util.Warning()? Easier to say."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "these 2 no longer needed after refactor"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "most spec options appear to be snake case - `fa_direct_raw_block`, let's stick to that convention"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Looks like we can then drop this dependency."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "3) Subscribe to the script change signal in `FlowMaster.__init__`. The event handler should call `self.masterq.put((\"script_change\", script))`. 4) Add a `handle_script_change` function, that once called, takes the script object and calls `script.reload()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This method is for unit testing only, right? How about making it package private? This way the readers would know that this is not a public API outside this package and would reduce the search space."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "accidental? i guess it's the same as any other boilerplate"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should import `Logger` from kinto.core import Service",
+      "reference": "shadowing the builtin, let's use function or func or callable_"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you add some good examples, for instance integers, strings and whatnot?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file should not be included in this PR.",
+      "reference": "Can we just have 2017 here @kmova if possible, as i seen in other projects as well( kubernetes etc..), they mentioned only the year when the file has been created."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "@Tony-LunarG I just realized that this differs from the previous behavior in that spirv-opt will run on the byte code if there are any \"group decorations.\" If this is a problem, I can add an additional constructor to keep the pre-existing behavior."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #",
+      "reference": "Nit: continuation lines should be indented 4 spaces from the start of the statement."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to set this to NULL?",
+      "reference": "Are these protected by any kind of lock?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name to `firewall_rule_name` or `firewall_rule_hierarchical_name` or `firewall_rule_hierarchical_name`",
+      "reference": "This should probably default to a string, as get_resource_ancestors is causing the tests to fail due to the rsplit on a None hierarchical_name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the name to the ingress class.",
+      "reference": "I prefer not to have markdown here, while it is nice for the site this is also shown for `kubectl explain` where this will look weird"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@durran Was this change intended to be included in this PR?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/setsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetsetset",
+      "reference": "Feels like this could have a default null value to remove the need for this explicit \"null\" use."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "\"failed to create...\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "No formatting directives, `glog.Error` will do just fine."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should just be `.not_to raise_error` otherwise it potentially hides errors"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be in the `healthAggregator.Report` method.",
+      "reference": "Need an `if err == nil {break}` above this line so that we don't log/sleep if the retry succeeds."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Doctrine\\DBALException?",
+      "reference": "Separate it to different methods :D Invoke method look's like old fashion portal class :D"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Collapse/expand animation of filter is broken - not smooth."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" install\" \" install\" \" install\" \" install\" \" install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install install",
+      "reference": "so during the `script` stage we run `mvn install`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.",
+      "reference": "we may need to move CandidateNamespace to this protocol as it is only used here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Just to confirm, this will take care of all the nodes in graph. right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this test to a separate test.",
+      "reference": "nit: remove this line. All \"arrange\" may be in one code block."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This name is not a good fit, what about `ExtendedAttribute`? Or even just `Attribute`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "lets keep our \"testing framework\" header only if possible. since there is an `assert(0)` in there, it is intended to halt on the first test failure."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "I was saving this white-space for my retirement :nit:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "What if you don't want to continue with the behavior, but you just want the deprecation to go away? Should we add `skip_after_action :discard_flash_if_xhr`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "change `accountNonceMap` to map[address.Address][]uint64"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "The `CLIENT_CONFIG` is \"client_config\" with underscore, so we can't reuse it in the second arg."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it's ok for now, but I don't think it's ok for now.",
+      "reference": "Does this mean all admins get the default batch size (which is 20) no matter the value of `-sync-batch-size`? It seems the command line flag doesn't do anything then does it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Set default value as empty array instead of null"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate logrus for routeUpd.Dst and logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) if routeUpd.Dst == nil { logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst).Debug(\"Ignoring route with no destination\") } else { logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) } logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst) logrus.WithField(\"routeUpd.Dst\", routeUpd.Dst)",
+      "reference": "Would be good to UT this case"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this was updated after linking the latest ethereum/tests after a submodules recursive update"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Todo: find a way to only do this in one spot, ideally with defaults for the stuff we use"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Imports should not have blank lines. Sorry there isn't a checkstyle rule running for this yet, we still need to update the build for this one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please move this to L3115 to group the code logically - all code for `feval` in one place."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "This was done to wrap the operation so it could be spied upon during testing. Likely needs to be undone once an alternative test is discovered."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I feel we need to impose a lower limit here maybe? What about a max and default for when none is set?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "ineffectual assignment to `err` (from `ineffassign`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Ahhh... this makes sense. Does using functions to defer evaluation of these values have anything to do with #916 (where the `Host: {host}` was 'cached' between different hostnames)? If not, could you help me understand what this change does?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Perhaps the only test needed is to see if the socket is not an invalid socket? Is the >= 0 test necessary at this point?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to render this form.",
+      "reference": "Could this line use `url: current_user.subscription`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `if (!preg_match('/'. $quoted_remove_var_id, '/') { break; }`",
+      "reference": "I was seeing `Warning: preg_match(): Unknown modifier 'a' in /path/to/project/vendor/vimeo/psalm/src/Psalm/Context.php on line 480` here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "The changes in this file are not necessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "run `make lint` to fix"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "we will need `assert result.success` instead. result will always be not null because it returns an execution result including several metadata - when the execution fails, it'd return an execution result whose `success` attribute is false."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can we mention how can one determine the best value given an infrastructure? Does it default to any value?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the backend.php file.",
+      "reference": "Leave this formatting the way it was please, that's the standard across all of October's files."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "@runcom says there is no need to use `selinux` here. `selinux` \"github.com/opencontainers/selinux/go-selinux\" The code should work fine without it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `LIFECYCLE_STATE_UNSPECIFIED`",
+      "reference": "nit: It might be worth defining these elsewhere as a python-type?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to true.",
+      "reference": "prefix it with azkaban. Maybe azkaban.server.schedule.enable_quartz?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It'd be nice if we also caught `Unknown variable $trusted / $server_facts / $settings::` here - while I highly doubt anyone is using them (and if they are they're surely misusing them) it'd be crazy-making to have a working plan suddenly start failing with no clue as to why."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a panic.",
+      "reference": "Probably need to understand/implement this one now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to check for it before.",
+      "reference": "It will be better to add contains check for key in hashAndFileNameToDep instead of null check over here. All of these should be inside that contains if case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "perhaps these magic numbers could go into a Defaults module somewhere? 8140 implies the default is for puppet server. i guess that's somewhat reasonable. but if we're trying to decouple beaker from puppet, maybe this should be 80?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `GLOBAL_STAT(num_bbs);`",
+      "reference": "style violation: { on own line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())(((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Could we accept caseless strings (e.g. `off`, `on`, `auto`) instead of numbers to indicate the mode? Of course, we should use an enum internally (as we already do)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The sender doesn't use `GetTipSet`, so please remove it from this interface."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We can get rid of this import then."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to \"azkaban-private-properties\"",
+      "reference": "These configurations are currently overwritten in the props we provide in our config files. They need to be overridden there as well after you make this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why is error ignored here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be used.",
+      "reference": ">PartitionFlagBiosGrubLegacy PartitionFlag = \"bios-grub\" [](start = 1, length = 55) I presume this is to fix a breaking change...and it's too late to fix the breaking change (since it already escaped into the world?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Is this explicitly ignoring the effect of deleted rows on partition metrics or is it just that you are short circuiting any delete files (as we can't use them anyways)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I would also check whether or not this \"defaultParameters\" is null or empty to allow for people to omit it from the config file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think event.Content is of type interface{}, so we may need %v here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this warning.",
+      "reference": "Note: `editor` depends on legacy `BibEdit`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "we should probably deprecate (and display a warning) the misspelled keyword arg here rather than removing it... and then add the new one. This changes a public API and will break any code that is currently using the misspelled version."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm wondering if a positive test case is needed here? Then we might compare the result DataFrame with a pre-created Koalas DataFrame."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be changed.",
+      "reference": "I think it was reversed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The setter \"setName\" can be package-private as well"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "Not sure if this is intentional or snuck in through find/replace; while this is a correct style fix (and is welcome in another PR), it should not be done here so that the commit maintains a logical changeset."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We can't allocate 1 GB of memory in 32-bit environments. We can't allocate 1 GB in 32-bit environments.",
+      "reference": "This makes me wonder if the TBufferTransport should have a size limit that is configurable, with a default of INT32_MAX, and then the test can make a smaller one like 4KB, and write 4KB and then one byte more, instead of using up 2GB of memory."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "If you use an enum for the streaming type, you wouldn't need to add each boolean as a separate attribute."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "can you check if you can use `sqlalchemy.exc.IntegrityError` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why we need to use recursive_mutex here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "am I correct these changes are related to: > I have removed a bunch of legacy functions for issuer generation... if so, I can see why that's a valuable change but this is already a pretty huge PR and these changes to use `gen` here feel quite distant from the goal of this specific PR; they should maybe be in their own PR, to make everything easier to review? or have I missed how these changes are linked to this PR?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "I think that this is an unused import"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "The string \"DVN_3_0\" appears in `if (!SOURCE_DVN_3_0.equals(xmlr.getAttributeValue(null, \"source\"))) {` in ImportDDIServiceBean. It's not an exact match so I don't *think* this will break dataset import from DDI but I thought I'd at least mention it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Can you add docstring to this? Also, this might be a nit but I think `CompareCommits` or `CommitRange` might be a better name. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "were all these ones missed in the previous PR so you are adding them now? the sources v1 and some of this? Is that right? If so, can you update the PR title"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a new version.",
+      "reference": "hmm should this be `VERSION_81` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "?????))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "What is the reason for increasing this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should addRequestId to all requests.",
+      "reference": "is there any reason we are not adding this to companion as well? There are no CORS concerns there, so adding probably shouldn't be a problem, no? **One question about the requestId;** Are the request Ids unique to each tus-js-client request, or are they unique to an upload instance instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be a new one.",
+      "reference": "The formatting is a little off here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps we should import assertj for tests. These assertions are so much cleaner with assertj. Don't know whether hamcrest equivalent exist (maybe it does)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Why not just sendInventoryItem(CONST_SLOT_FIRST, player->getInventoryItem(CONST_SLOT_FIRST)));",
+      "reference": "You should use C++-type casts instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `UpdateShard` function.",
+      "reference": "Looks like each AppendHistoryNodes is its own transaction - what happens if `len(request.NewWorkflowNewEvents) == 5` but we only succeed in writing 3 of them? Will the system be able to pick up from there later? I'm _guessing_ the answer is related to the `ON CONFLICT` and `INSERT IGNORE` changes below? What does Cassandra do?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log.",
+      "reference": "why are you replacing log here? it is defined above and contains EntryID and SPIFFEID"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why not `checkOpenvpn` as in client command?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "> Note: Non-headless tests (that run on selenium-webdriver) need to wire up to mocha reporter to collect all the results and report them. (See `test-webdriver.js`). But for other tests this can be skipped."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think we should apply IDNA encoding for the host here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to",
+      "reference": "No need to use `this->` here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this condition is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I can't quite tell, is there a reason why we're finding this condition again when it was done a few lines above? Or was this a mistaken paste?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "doh. My fault, sorry."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why do we returning `interface{}` here? Don't we have a predefined type for `ID`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `AnalyticsDashboardWidgetTopAcquisitionSources.js`",
+      "reference": "`lodash` shouldn't be grouped under WordPress dependencies"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file. I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Not sure why you want to make the distinction between null and undefined? And also `null == undefined` anyway so I think you could simply have `!noteIds` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Almost makes me wonder if this should default to Rpc-Context so everything defaults under Rpc-"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed (from `goimports`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "would these require any account lock here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The else doesn't return anything?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "if (typeof (opts.fee)!== 'undefined' || typeof (opts.feeSat)!=='undefined') {"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I not sure we need to change this method's logic. Isn't no perms and invalid config?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "this is an abysmal amount of time. can you explain under which circumstances you should wait for a minute for a message?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `deployJobOpts` file.",
+      "reference": "Can we add this code to `job_package.go` and `svc_package.go`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `NextPlanNodeIDKey` for this.",
+      "reference": "While you're here, can you change the casing on this so it is unexported? `nextPlanNodeIDKey` instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "thanks for tidying all these up, as you can tell they've been used pretty arbitrarily in the past to just exclude things from bootstrap..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Again, `no_duplicates=False` would be clearer here..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "how to fix this?",
+      "reference": "shouldnt we stop these routines BEFORE the db closed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "It fills me with endless sadness that we can't use Selenium's own `SessionId` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This will always need to be displayed to users."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `cart_items` method.",
+      "reference": "Maybe we make an `ORIGINS` constant on the Cart model instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this field should be removed.",
+      "reference": "looks like this is not needed anymore with boltdb migration. lets confirm with @fenxiong"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "shadow: declaration of \"err\" shadows declaration at line 408 (from `govet`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.",
+      "reference": "Again, the existing level is correct --- we're letting users know about something that might cause there tests to fail."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Required by the libcalico-go changes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "You want \"current_min_count\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why changes in this file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This doesn't look right. I think what you want here is `\\\\[([^\\\\]]+)\\\\]\\\\[[A-Za-z_][A-Za-z_.0-9]*]*\\\\]`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "@AndrewRayCode thanks for contributing Could you write/modify the specs to make sure that this description is working properly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I would have tested 304 only there."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "`TimeoutAfter` to be safe."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "So the 32-bit tests on the new kernel hit this case? Won't they fail in debug build?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there a recommended quote style for attributes? I see single and double here, double further down."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the spec file.",
+      "reference": "The description of `load_time` here is different from the description below..is that intentional?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Actually it could also be a video playlist. But music is used more often."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should delete options.session and delete options.session and delete options.session and delete options.session and delete options.session and delete options.session and delete options.session",
+      "reference": "From the ticket: > I understand why a session ID would be silently omitted for implicit sessions, but what is the reasoning behind omitting it for explicit sessions instead of raising a logic error to the user? So what this change is doing is \"silently omitting\" the session if its an unacknowledged write. I think we want to actually return an error in this case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "You can simplify this by doing: return (EndTime - StartTime) * 60 / PointsAcrossPeak;"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I think it's the time for bumping `REQUIRED_QT_VERSION` to the last LTS, 5.12. `QFontMetrics::horizontalAdvance()` doesn't exist in 5.10."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I already set up cd10 for \"inventory_version in google analytics. I've added cd11 for Boltdir Type now"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@henrikhodne We are lazily skipping `jruby-*` here (assuming that JRuby all of a sudden start using these version numbers)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "How does this cope with values like `5.001`? Shouldn't that set precision to 0? Instead it is set to 2."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Rather than having a sleep here, we should check to see if the service we're waiting for is up yet, using something like dockerize. Not critical this second, but would be nice for later."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `scripts/utils/console.mjs` so we don't have to worry about it.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure if there are any links to swap for Handosntable package. Should this be a top lvl script?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It seems like it's too big now: can we remove signal_frame_extra_size from line 537? That should only be needed when placing xstate separately. It seems like it isn't needed at all for pending? Also, if we have special heap align forward for us, we don't need this align here either."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Just double checked the `-in` operator. It's PS3 only, so we might want to change `$_ -in $allowedArgs` to `$allowedArgs -contains $_`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a property.",
+      "reference": "Might as well use translate here, as @jcsteh suggested"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Definitely an improvement as long as the old tests pass (i.e backwards compatible)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "nit: non functional change"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "The file is not required - if you're using an IAM instance profile, for example. I'm not sure we can error 100% of the time if it's missing. @randomvariable any suggestions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "There is a very similar line `lowType = expr.Low.Type().(*types.Basic)` a few lines above this line. Can you change that in the same way?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the README file.",
+      "reference": "New files should be copyright Hyperledger Besu Contributors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "if I give a non-existent script, then I don't get an errors. I would have expected the `copy` method to raise, but maybe `net-sftp` silently exits?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "@itholic can you also update the parameters in the docs?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "The super impl Spliterator.getComparator() throws an IllegalStateException by default. Is it really necessary to return null? If null is used somewhere it will throw a NPE, which is roughly the same as throwing an IllegalStateException. I'm just curious - I'm sure there is a reason!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a bug?",
+      "reference": "Do we need to do the same in Avro `WriteBuilder` too? I don't think we use that method right now but should make sense for consistency. We already handle that for Parquet."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ()))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( if((( if( if if if if if if if if if if if if if if if if",
+      "reference": "can you make all the `_` into `-` to be consistent with the other options?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `CloudformationTemplate` class.",
+      "reference": "What do you think of renaming this file to `stack.go` or `cfn_stack.go`? `common.go`/`util.go` don't provide us anything descriptive about the contents of the file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bug.",
+      "reference": "It isn't a very effective example if it requires access to the internals I can't tell just looking at the diff why this is needed, can you provide a little context?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Do we need to include `BoltSpec::Transport::Local` here?",
+      "reference": "Why does this include `bolt/inventory`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We called `t._1.equals(...)` where `t._1` potentially could be `null`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `forms` class.",
+      "reference": "I don't think we should include the `hasAttribute` test here. Even without aria-valuenow, it's still an aria range element. This check is going to make reuse of this function problematic. Better to move the attribute check part outside this function IMO."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't it be optional?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the client.",
+      "reference": "would be helpful to make these a package level constant so they are accessible to the user. similar to Service Name. Not directly related note, v2 SDK ServiceName should be renamed to ServiceEndpointPrefix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `include $this->realpath($path)? include $this->realpath($path) : null;`",
+      "reference": "Duplicate call to the method. Better to put in a variable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "\"and returns that\" -- it looks like this method has no return value."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Modifications are also needed for PolygonMask."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Does this really make a difference?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Added a validator for _root_, which is now added automatically since the schema used here declares _root_."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "The other properties are `file-open-cost`, not `open-file-cost`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "confused by this: what we need here is not libunwind but libunwind-dev right? Why skipping detection?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "just in case helps, it this related with this PR?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "This is incomplete I think (at least source_address and ip_address are missing)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "We have a `stop` method here, we should probably be calling that instead of just exiting. There could be important resources to close or cleanup nicely now or in the future."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "fixes ArgNullEx when using both `x-ms-parameter-grouping` and media type `application/xml` in the same operation (issue #2236)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "`NotFound` is a generic error code derived from the HTTP response message's status code, and can be returned for any S3 operation that responds with a 404 status code and no other error code present. Due to this the constant `ErrCodeBucketNotFound`. In addition, these constants are generated based on the API model defined by Amazon S3, modifications to the file directly will be lost during regeneration of the API. With that said, we are looking at ways to work with the Amazon S3 team to better represent this error in a way that is more easily consumed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "@johnduarte I was curious about the case when the operating system was neither `osx` or `win`; in this case, the test will indeed pass, but nothing will have actually really been tested. Should this have a `skip_test` condition at the top?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think this example was included by accident? It doesn't seem to belong in this PR (but a separate PR with this would be nice!)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be null.",
+      "reference": "Just fixing a bunch of outdated java docs in this file"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think it may be safer not to touch Concurrent to normal."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "is this for everything, or just legacy?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `processNewChange` function.",
+      "reference": "I think this should be a `MongoError` right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `https://github.com/drud/drupal8/releases/download/v0.2.2/files.tar.gz`",
+      "reference": "This is currently a db.tar.gz with just one.sql file in it. It might be worth another test (or maybe I'll find one) that has more than one sql file in it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add a new rule.",
+      "reference": "Why these changes to existing tests?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the service name mappings in a separate place.",
+      "reference": "It should be `IsNullOrWhitespace` I believe, since we're going to trim the value afterwards (and I just realized the other configuration keys have the same issue)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is just for consistency + searchability with the transports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "please run gofmt."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "thats kind of a bummer, why do we have to give it full access? if it is just for the private interfaces i'd personally rather have those interfaces pollute the public exported symbols than open the tests up like this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Because this is an unexpected situation so can you add a log here to help us figure out what resource is causing this problem?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "just observing that this innocent looking change seems important to this PR. Previously this data had disappeared from the state."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be a condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition condition",
+      "reference": "Actually, I do have one question: You mention that each warning is for a different range. Should we add the rowcounts instead of using the max?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "it is confusing to return ID as Name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "body is being used here for the first time without every being populated. This will error. To run tests do `./go clean test_py` and that will run the Firefox tests"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "commit mesasge: I would append \"...Kernel::loadClassCache() method call\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Keys.COMMAND seems to be an alias to Keys.META. That isn't mentioned?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line.",
+      "reference": "You can move this import down to before line 8 (import org.junit.Test;)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "It's okay to add the `scanner_index_id` here. But we still should keep the `inventory_index_id` reference because it will help the user to know right away, which inventory the violation is coming from, without having to do another lookup."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this shouldn't be beforeClickOn, but rather beforeSubmit? and added to WebDriverEventListener. Since submit does not synthesize the 'click' events, this isn't accurate."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the view. I don't think we should add this to the view.",
+      "reference": "Should this be I18n'd?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good change.",
+      "reference": "We don't typically use `ImmutableList` to avoid leaking it in methods that are accidentally public or purposely part of the API. I'm +1 for returning `ImmutableList.copyOf(errors)` below, but I don't think we should guarantee the list will be an `ImmutableList`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@greglandrum Is this test sufficient?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this column to the migration.",
+      "reference": "I think Rails complains about the `null: false` part if we ever decide to roll this migration back. Might need to split this up into separate `up/down` methods to handle that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I don't think we need this line. You're logging in `waitForContainerTransition()` anyway"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't the `:attribute` placeholder appear?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Could you update this to `structLike` instead of `arg`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I only now spot this `freebsd,!baremetal` in the code, which doesn't make a lot of sense. The fact that there is `linux,!baremetal` is because baremetal targets pretend to be linux/arm to get the standard library to compile. Such a `!baremetal` exclusion is not necessary for FreeBSD. But this is not something that needs fixing in this PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not change the file file.",
+      "reference": "Ugh, we were using cwd? =("
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This can probably be removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "put this sentence in `if (onResult_) { }`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `config-validator_constraints.sh` file.",
+      "reference": "Will this always be started up as default? Is there any impact to the VM in terms of load and memory usage?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Thanks for fixing the typo's but given that this is a fork of the other commandline.cs file they will still exist there :( Part of the reason forks suck."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.",
+      "reference": "This doesn't seem related to docs? :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Having a negative in the variable/method name makes the code harder to read. Also, you inverted the logic but didn't invert the default value. I suggest sticking to the original name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Think you need to keep `RawWrite` around as obsolete until NLog6 (Property that just assigns `ForceTraceWriteLine`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))(()))((())(((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "I would expect this to be named *get* not *set*: it's a query; it's not setting some persistent state."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "maybe should rename this to be `run_status_sensor_definition.py`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed to SparkWriteOptions.",
+      "reference": "Do we want to add the other write options in this PR or keep the refactor separate?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "either make this a config or a constant we can define at the top. Burying this in the code is no good."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Same about new metrics. Can we avoid adding them?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "I know this is a port from the previous PR, but I am wondering if we can take the chance to improve the naming? `--vpc-host-project-id`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "The test description says it's \"by reference\". We should change the description"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the validation category to the validation category.",
+      "reference": "A C# newbie question here: would it make sense to declare Id as an abstract property so any subclass Must have its own Id?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "just looks like you should return an **empty map** with nil error"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "could you also update the starting log at L146?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "Also this probably should be `error.As()` or something like it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is Safari specific and should be defined somewhere in the `safaridriver` namespace"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `EXIT_SUCCESS` or `EXIT_FAILURE`.",
+      "reference": "Let's maybe be nice and `unlinkat()` here in the interest of having `/run` be less littered. Or in addition/alternatively, make the file `/run/ostree/initramfs-mount-var` since we already made `/run/ostree/` for the deployment staging bits."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Not sure if this doesn't require explicitly adding this library to cmake."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "we should probably deprecate (and display a warning) the misspelled keyword arg here rather than removing it... and then add the new one. This changes a public API and will break any code that is currently using the misspelled version."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "seems reasonable to also want to include the 'to' location?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "This `if` statement can be merged with the above `if opts[:collect_perf_data]`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "But won't we do case-insensitive matching for all the drivers? For example, we will get the revision field case-insensitively. Let's make this case-sensitive. I think the way the mongo driver works, by lowercasing field names, will be OK with that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `
    <%= @product.tagline %>
    ` instead of `
    <%= @product.tagline %>
    `",
+      "reference": "I believe this should be on `workshops/show` now, not `products/show`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a test.",
+      "reference": "If we return error when we are unable to found country in database, using country detector would be much easier - if error was not returned, that means country was returned :) This doesn't have to be solved in this PR, but since you're adding such case, we can add a `TODO` just to track this :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": ".NET Framework: Fallback to `DD_INTEGRATIONS` if `DD_DOTNET_TRACER_HOME` was not set."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can you use `authority, _, path = rest.partition(b\"/\")` here? That should make stuff a bit cleaner."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this needs to be a float if its a number of seconds... :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `array_values`",
+      "reference": "Please add \"Array\" back, right now it's not a proper sentence."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "@tkaessmann when I ran tests I saw this line has a bug. It inverts the SHOULD and MUST. Hopefully I fixed it and merged it without the bug."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think telemetryConfig.Enable should be set to true.",
+      "reference": "There may be another bug, it looks like we're already in a `if telemetryConfig.Enable` block at this point, maybe that block should be unnested?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This... looks like it plainly didn't work before? Good catch. I would suggest we change the logic here to 1. Check if `self.headers[\"content_type\"].startswith(\"multipart/form-data\")`, and if that's not the case, add a content-type header with a random (?) boundary. The point here is that if someone assigns to `.multipart_form = ` in their addon, the header should be updated accordingly if the request was not multipart before. 2. *After* that, call `self.content = multipart.encode(self.headers, value)` (as we do right now)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "importShadow: shadow of imported from 'github.com/stretchr/testify/require' package'require' (from `gocritic`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "Wouldn't it be enough to change the condition in the for loop to `link_state!= IBL_UNLINKED`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I'm not familiar with signed setups, but this does not seem to offer a way to choose between GPG and signapi verification. Are they usually either both enabled or both disabled? Would this be better suited as a verb with flags for different methods?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "assignments should only be cuddled with other assignments (from `wsl`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "would it make sense to mock oauth in a way that we direct a user to this endpoint on login (in a test)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Since these two lines use the same logic, it may be cleaner to use an `if` statement rather than duplicating it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "unnecessary blank line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Nit: no need for \"to\" at the end of the doc because it already uses \"to which\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "I would just say \"Signed before publishing.\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be included.",
+      "reference": "We can just include the public UDPv4TransportDescriptor header here..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is useful when you use the same tag for manifest upload.",
+      "reference": "These three atomic functions done separately are not atomic. There is a possibility of data race, as nothing is guarding Total in between lines 182 and 183. Total got on line 182 may be changed before new value is stored on line 183 by some other goroutine resulting an incorrect value. Mutex should be used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Is this because you don't have % on your version of Slot? I don't really care either way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please use var declaration for variables you are declaring. I could not find one for userInjectedExpandableRowHeaderColDef and finalExpandableRowHeaderColDef. Also code styling in the if block needs to be corrected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "If cachedLibPath > 200 bytes, it will overflow errString."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the list of roles.",
+      "reference": "Talked this through with a few more folks. I think it would be better to flag prohibited attributes for review, instead of outright failing them. ARIA labels are used fairly liberally. We don't really know if they are actually needed whenever they are used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this check into the `SyncService.verifyFee` method.",
+      "reference": "Let's keep it to avoid the diff"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "nit: not directly related to this PR, but shall we use `ImmutableSet` for consistency?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Layout/DotPosition: Place the. on the previous line, together with the method call receiver."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "We send the `instanceUrl` encrypted, but never bothered to decrypt it. I guess it was working because we never did any org split testing where the `instanceUrl` actually changes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can this be moved to QbftBlockHeaderFunctions class as it is only used for qbft"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`Tags` now comes from the `PropertyBagHolder` base class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure where this should go, but one of the `get_extents` methods should mention that `range_type` can be `'data'` or `'combined'` (are there others?). I found out those are the two expected values by searching the code..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")#endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend.......................................................................................................................................................................... */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */ */",
+      "reference": "please revert all of this stuff in core.. I'll take another pass after. cheers and thanks for the help!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove the sourceName from the test.",
+      "reference": "Why was this needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I see that CI found a couple test hangs, maybe your `TogglePrefetcher` change below wasn't enough and this still needs to be a `go` invocation for some reason?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I do not understand this change"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `true` to lower case keys.",
+      "reference": "It would be helpful to clarify this is only for unmarshaling a response. not marshaling a request."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I have no explanation for why this test wasn't erroring before... There are two applicable nodes in this tree, one passes, the other fails."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Remove the \"rm\" from the end of \"HAVE_CONFIG_H\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Non-Blocking: This might be too trivial. It doesn't allow us to test that it's being callled."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add new datatype in /common/dfs2rec.h, don't forget add new case here.",
+      "reference": "Not sure why the ternary expressions are used here, since the true and false results are the same."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is `vertigo` another name for Vertica databases?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "That doesn't do the right thing - it strips any of the characters m, a, i, l, t, o and :. It'd probably be cleaner to do this before converting the URL to a string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why the white space changes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is now outside the mutex, so could race."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "hmmm did this pass spotless check? I don't think we typically use wildcard imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`lockBeforeLock` -> `lockBeforeGet` (here and everywhere below)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Do we need to internalize net.sourceforge.pmd.lang.java.ast.JavaParserConstants on master, so that we can rename it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a Guid.",
+      "reference": "The GUID here was incorrect, because of that, Vault plugin loading was failing. Should I change to any correct GUID, or it has some special meaning?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "just confirming: if we remove explicit Collect(), then we are relying on the provider dispose... which has a hard-coded 5000 msec to finish flushing. On the other hand, if we keep explicit Collect(), we can pass an explicit timeout to it. (we were not doing it now and was relying on Infinite timeout). Net effect of this change in test code: Previously we would wait indefinitely for Collect() to be over. With this PR, we hope Collect() will be over in 5 secs. If we ever need more than 5 sec, we need to bring back Collect(maxTimeInMilliSecs..)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "What do you think of a name like azkaban.server.logging.kafka.brokerList? This way the name signals that this is a server config."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe change into `return _concurrentWrites?? PlatformDetector.SupportsSharableMutex`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "indentation of resulting file is different between 11 and 8 where 8 doesn't indent lines and 11 does"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "Do we still need to return the `Response` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Here `global.VERDACCIO_API_URL` I'd use something different as `global.TEST_VERDACCIO_API_URL` then when you search by `VERDACCIO_API_URL` we don't confuse with `window.VERDACCIO_API_URL`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this option to the command line.",
+      "reference": "This is totally fine, but consider whether in the future a YAML input format would be better. If so, we can plan for it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a property. I think it should be a property, not a property.",
+      "reference": "This should be `DD_TRACE_CONVENTION` to follow our... conventions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Be careful memory leaks. memory leaks occur when getters.getAliasProp == nullptr. right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to get rid of the orphan subs check?",
+      "reference": "Why not just a time.Time?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a tensor, not a tensor.",
+      "reference": "Please do not submit a commit that is not part of this PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to check for nil here.",
+      "reference": "This is small braking change: there is no way to clear description any more. If value is empty string, description will not be updated at all. It will affect existing Thrift endpoints also."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can you open a separate PR with this patch? It seems valuable outside the context of this PR!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I would suggest to have plurals in the api `\"/chunks/{address}\"`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Let's just not do this. We don't have LabelAtoms.O17 here. This is just a short-cut to avoid needing to write out a more verbose function like: 5O\" - 5O i.e. Add 5 x 17O atoms to replace 5 x 16O atoms. This was the original implementation in Skyline before I added the checkboxes to denote simply labeling all atoms in the amino acid."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.",
+      "reference": "1:D100: Docstring missing 23:D400: First line should end with '.', not 'p' 23:D200: One-line docstring should not occupy 3 lines 36:D400: First line should end with '.', not 'n' 36:D200: One-line docstring should not occupy 3 lines 48:D400: First line should end with '.', not 'p' 48:D200: One-line docstring should not occupy 3 lines 63:D400: First line should end with '.', not 'p' 63:D200: One-line docstring should not occupy 3 lines 76:D400: First line should end with '.', not 'p' 76:D200: One-line docstring should not occupy 3 lines"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `loopResultRow` class.",
+      "reference": "Adding a warning or an error in the Thelia log would be a nice idea."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "nit: `Set` (and swap `forEach`s for `for (const i of CONNECTION_EVENTS)`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "nit: Is this `using` statement still needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Dont need to cast `string` -> `string`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.",
+      "reference": "why doesn't the API return an error in this case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.",
+      "reference": "Not sure how particularly useful these exceptions are. Seem to be exceptions required in copying and pasting the EndpointResolver over. I wonder if it makes sense to move these out of ``exceptions.py``"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]<",
+      "reference": "Can we re-add this? I think that grouping is useful (though would be open to putting them in a mixin or something)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "Overall LGTM, one nit is that I think `partitionFields` here would be good to be renamed so that it's easy to tell it's just for collision detection. Also I wonder if we want to do this check for other transformations too (e.g. bucket, and record numBuckets in the string), so that we might be able to combine `fields` and `partitionFields` into potentially something like a LinkedHashMap?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Don't need the `or None` here as the flag will already default to None. Also, `some_dict.get('foo')` will also default to `None`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please, use the default padding here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "let's actually use the direct include: `require('../core/error').MongoError;`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it would be better to add a new tab to the list of links, and add a new tab to the list of links, and add a new tab to the list of links, and add a new tab to the list of links. That way, you don't have to add a new tab to the list of links.",
+      "reference": "You're missing a space before the `\"` here and below, but I'll fix it up when merging."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "remove this debugging code?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be a `int[]` or a `int[]`?",
+      "reference": "s/`terms text`/`terms's text`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": ":bike: :derelict_house:, but maybe the default option should be `multipleResults: false` or `combineMultipleResults: false`? i feel like `replaceResultInFormWithNew` is very verbose but also doesn't immediately clarify what it's for."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good feature.",
+      "reference": "Line is too long. [87/80]"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Are you using an automated tool for sorting the imports?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "If this is `project_number` now, can we also update the `id` the description?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "* This will defer until the function returns. Are you sure this won't happen multiple times. * Alternatively, why is the deadline timer not defined outside the outer loop? * More generally, why are we looping in the first place instead of reading one frame and returning?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Should we rename the traces parameter now that this isn't just traces?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I don't think it makes sense to have both `TEST_ONLY` and `NONBLOCK`. We should probably leave `NONBLOCK` out."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Need to remove the surface destroy listener (and `wl_list_init` it so that `touch_point_destroy` still works)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "create ticket to investigate this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "If we want to expose this for FFI use in the standard library, it needs to get either a `pony_` or `ponyint_` prefix to its name, for cleanliness of the function namespace. `pony_` means it is a public API meant for use by third party code, whereas `ponyint_` means it is internal. Unless there is a good reason to make it public, we should prefer to keep it internal because public functions require us to treat any changes to them as breaking changes in Pony. So, this function should end up named `ponyint_address_length`, or something else with that prefix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Fuse for shared volumes is a px specific implementation. libopenstorage doesn't know about it, right? So should this be called DeviceVirtualMount (or something similar) instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `TargetMethodArgumentsToLoad` class.",
+      "reference": "`bool` vs `BOOL` in native side :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I think maybe you moved it to util but this is still around and it should get it from util instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Do we need to test the redirection?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Tsts, that's why... activity leak about to happen"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You should do a select here IMO just to be safe so we do not block forever."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "I'll replace this with the actual outbox object soon."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Do we need to reportUnusedVariables here?",
+      "reference": "Providers are called *before* `setUp()`, so I don't think you can access properties here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test method. I don't think that's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "While this allows it to be applied does it correctly cause the entire class to be skipped?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "clean unnecessary modification."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "I think these assertions want to be `.to.not.exist` which would pass for `null` or `undefined`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a blank line here.",
+      "reference": "Don't think you need this since this is not a URL example."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Maybe a test to check if the generated value is within the boundaries would be nice, what do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Suppresses UTF-8 BOM in outputs"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "order wrong for \"outgoing and incoming\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a",
+      "reference": "We know it's a boolean and it's in the MemoryCircuitBreaker, why not simply call it `enabled` (like many other Solr plugins do)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Should team be a \"feature\" that can be \"included\" or a type? In code it seems to me that a `team` flag makes sense."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why is this called update params when it's updating project info? Should p called project?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to update history_tree table.",
+      "reference": "`upsertHistoryTreeQuery` is a better name for this query now. Is it ok to change history?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "b did not mean branch - it meant the next version - so probably better to be able to release from a tag on the branch so we can create a hotfix branch of the 1.4.1 tag and tag it 1.4.1b and then version is picked as 1.4.1b"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Keep the mpi.h include, just move it to after adios2.h and guard with the ifdef. Otherwise everything else looks good."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `rootfsMountMode` and move it to `rootfsMountMode` in `rootfsMountMode` and move it to `rootfsMountMode` in `rootfsMountMode` in `rootfsMountMode` in `rootfsMountMode` in `rootfsMountMode` in `rootfsMountMode`.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this be something like `rootmountmode` to fit the pattern of the other fields' serialized representations?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Why were we initializing here in the first place?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "This should be removed, and instead set the logger to None."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));.length.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................",
+      "reference": "Storing a reference to source data isn't the best choice. Maybe you can find a different way (without storing the reference) to save removed data?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `trafodion.php` file.",
+      "reference": "Is the tutorial going to move to the new Trafodion website or will it stay on the Confluence wiki? (Check with Gunnar.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to convert retryTaskFailure to retryTaskV2Failure.",
+      "reference": "maybe call it `fromRetryTaskV2Failure`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "The diff for this class is difficult to walk through because I reorganized it to be much more clear. There are improvements throughout, but the most important are in the new `createSmokeTest.*` methods."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We suggest keeping this logic in lines between 173-175 to restrict its influence."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "why not? maybe another phpstan plugin"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't need to change.",
+      "reference": "That was a really bad CR from me before if I did not spot it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does this resolve the scenario when the user-triggered forseti process is running, and it would be killed by the cron job restarting the server?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does this happen somewhere else now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove trailing space at this line, amend the commit, and then force-push."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This should be grouped together with the import of \"go.opentelemetry.io/{api/core,sdk/export}\" below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "What's the impact to people upgrading to the new version? If they don't change their file names, they'll suddenly be broken. While I agree that your naming makes more intuitive sense, I think we need to maintain backwards compatibility. Please choose a new rules file name for the new scanner and keep ke_rules.yaml for the existing version scanner."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Shall we add some docstrings clearly to describe when to use which clearly? For example, `spark_frame` now should always be used via `df._internal.applied.spark_frame` for Spark DataFrame APIs that internally creates new query execution plan with the different output length. For expressions and/or functions, `df._internal.spark_frame` should be used together with Spark column instances, in order to avoid the operations on different DataFrames."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "nit: `.` at the end of line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure I agree that this should take priority over \"Loading\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Was this an intentional deletion? Why not just allow overwrite of `deploy_mode`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "better to call it as syncCVRStatus.. just syncCVR is very confusing"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "should we make this not a pointer? so that when we embed the struct a copy is made instead of modifying the original object."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `settings['permission_backend'] = 'kinto_redis.permission'`",
+      "reference": "Does this mean that `kinto_redis` is required to run tests?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))gngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngngng)))))))))))))))))))))))))(endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));endendendendAAAAAAAAAAAAAA",
+      "reference": "will this ensure the indexes for ordered writes as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list.",
+      "reference": "Put `BoolArray` first?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `import('./site')`, not `import('./site')`.",
+      "reference": "I believe this whole file can be deleted now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "We should specify format for a user. I.e: Integer, 1000 == 1 MYST"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does the errors returned from these controllers indicate which controller threw the error? If not, there might be some value in making the \"CustomControllers\" type a `map[string]func(ctx context.Context, sc *server.Context) error` with the name of the controller as the key and include the key in this error string. This would apply for below as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "maybe at least pull the file identifier arg out of the if?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "You can most likely remove that (and the try/finally) too, as we shouldn't have any flickering from removing/inserting tabs anymore now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Could you add `s` to `@return`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Moving this code inside the last case statement doesn't seem right. Why are we defining `name` and `is_relative` variables there if we aren't using them anywhere?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Will cause any bugs without this change? I've seen this code block(L293-302) many times... ;-)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.",
+      "reference": "You are opening a door to race-condition-hell by returning an unprotected dictionary. I recommend that you return `IReadOnlyDictionary` that only works on the platforms where it is known."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a promise.",
+      "reference": "also seems we should not skip this test"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "This is mostly for my understanding: is `DeleteFile[] deletes` a mandatory builder param now for file scan tasks? If not, from a v1 / v2 compatibility standpoint would it make sense to add an overloaded constructor?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FetchAgedQueuedExecutableFlows` table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table table",
+      "reference": "Can the error message reflect the purpose of the query more closely? Something like \"Error fetching executions queued for a long time\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Are you making it so startup script HAS to be in sources?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Might be more clear to just have one if statement?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I think it's better to add a `logger.error('Error in the response handler: %s, data: %s' % (str(e), json.dumps(response, indent=4)), exc_info=True)` to the logger.",
+      "reference": "remember that logger methods will do string interpolation automatically anyway, so you should be able to do `logger.error('message %s', var, exc_info=True)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `render_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_send_handler_handler_handler_handler_handler_send_handler_handler_handler_send_handler_handler_handler_send_handler_handler_handler_send_handler_handler_send_handler_",
+      "reference": "Perhaps rename to `render_service_args_struct`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the crypto2 package to the `crypto2` package.",
+      "reference": "clean the name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think we would expect StatusNotFound instead of StatusForbidden?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (",
+      "reference": "Since this is a recurring theme, would it make sense to have an ioencode interface for it like `ioencode_rank()` that takes an integer rank like before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is it a concern that we initialize these fields irrespective of whether resources like cgroup/volumes are enabled or not?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Wouldn't this be the first panic in yarpc? What do we do for transport validation? Return errors?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "have you envisioned other cancellation reasons?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this to `@phpstan-param array $bundles`",
+      "reference": "For the record, class-string is now suported by PHPStorm. Don't know if it's worth moving it to `@phpstan-param` then."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))(()))((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This prevents negative IDs, but it doesn't check for too large IDs. You should probably just do the same check you do for `QWebengineScript` here as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this flag is needed.",
+      "reference": "This might be very confusing. Maybe `resource-tags`? I"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We may use `_pair` to wrap `dilation`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the right way to go about it, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "what's with `setReadonly`? Why we deleted it totally?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Currently I think this is not acceptable. I think the value should be chosen by the author of the parser. (Personally \"type\" is better than \"typename\".)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to import the ec2 sdk here.",
+      "reference": "Is this excessive?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Ohhhh I see, this change was previously having *no effect* - I had thought you meant we were doing something like bind mounting the initramfs' `/etc` as the real `/etc` but we'd clearly notice if that happened, we'd be missing all sorts of config files etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return a string here.",
+      "reference": "I think this needs a more specific name, like `sequenceNumberOverride`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Ought we just raise an exception if the adapter isn't defined?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Should this have been removed? We still set the region to \"aws-global\" in v3model.go#L115"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ()) ()) () ()) (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "You could shorten this to `qs or None`. But why not just build a dict of parameters we want to include and only add `querystring` if there's something here, similar to the way you do in the error view?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "sorry if I'm missing it somewhere else in the code, but do you need to create a `ticker := time.NewTicker`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Inline this, as we don't use it again."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think the instantiation of the new objects i.New() and T.New() need to be done in a function to have local variable and reduce the amount of memory used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "This is probably more digits than needed - perhaps rename OneOverK0 to IonMobility instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `ApiMethodType` class.",
+      "reference": "End with 'Method', so: - FlattenedAsyncCallSettingsMethod - FlattenedAsyncCancellationTokenMethod"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "`localsecrets` should be updated in the same way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the ability to issue a transaction that marks an account non-participating.",
+      "reference": "We'll want to PR a spec change into github.com/algorandfoundation/specs. (Side note: It might or might not make sense to combine this protocol upgrade with Tsachi's protocol upgrade for fixing the reward rate calculation.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Use `FullBlock`, it comes from the same package."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "do we plan to use anything else than flask for making HTTP requests inside localstack? if so, it maybe makes sense not to strongly couple to flask for now, and just leave the type of the `request` function parameters open for now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think we should make this a separate test case: it seems like making the precondition fail is the test case that would ensure that this escape hatch worked. Otherwise, if it's always true, then it would be the same as if the escape hatch didn't modify the outgoing request."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Error return value of `s.idx.BuildIndex` is not checked"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "What's the reason for excluding those from the fuzzing here? You probably could just add some inner type via `functools.partial` like below with `FormatString`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Its this golint or govet stuff?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "These are good cleanups: I didn't realize there were so many like this in the samples and tests. But given that there are quite of few of these mcontext changes I would separate these into their own PR (no need for an issue: iX branch) since they are logically distinct. Cleaner history, simpler revert paths, etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is just a random struct equality, no value here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Just spotted the `local` on here; that shouldn't be needed - no reason to limit this config to env vars only"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the top of the file.",
+      "reference": "I had some weird issues when importing ``from.. import util`` getting the wrong utilities, hence I did this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please remove this line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set at all.",
+      "reference": "should this state that we're falling back to `:acceptable_exit_codes`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this works. The dataframe object is encapsulated in the value parameter. This might be the root of the failing checks."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why was it necessary to add this check against `this.servers.size`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This tests for < 0 but the error message says it must be > 0. The `if` should probably be `<=` to match the message."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Short circuits when it's something like a WebPackRequest, which we should instrument and test specifically."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Should this be true now by default?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate server.",
+      "reference": "/DispatcherStatistics? /statistics is a bit confusing with /stats"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in a future PR.",
+      "reference": "nit: Wondering if we should simply filter on `\"tail: unrecognized file system type\"`, or is the type identifier `0x794c7630` always the same?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "I think the goal of using `fake-cluster-id` was to make it sure clear that this is a fake cluster, replacing this with UUID only now makes these clusters look very similar to real ones which can cause problems.. any reason why we didn't go for the original recommendation from slack thread of `fake-cluster-UUID` @twiest"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I need to spruce up my `mypy` knowledge but I think this is incorrect. Using `T_Node` twice makes it so that both should be the same type. I think this would be better: `Tuple[Optional[T_Node], Optional[nodes.NodeNG ]]`. It might even better to do: `Union[Tuple[None, None]. Tuple[T_Node, nodes.NodeNG ]]` as that shows that `None` should always pair with `None`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Nit: below on line 449 we use `%v` to print an error - perhaps would be nice to do it in the same way in both places (but probably not that important). Similar in other places in this PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a boolean.",
+      "reference": "I'm not against adding a kill event, but we need to do it properly, please. That means listing it in events.py, adding docs for it, and so forth."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "this line can be lifted outside of the if-then? In fact only CreateString / CreateSharedString needs to be inside of it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I think the `EpisodesApplyActionFragment` is unused now. So please delete it :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It seems like we should leave `notice` here since it can be configured in Bolt config files, and that's what sets the console config for messages from Puppet. For example, this will break plans that call `notice()` in their apply blocks."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This metrics is only exposed in executors. Should it be defined in azkaban.execapp.ExecMetrics instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I originally factored out these functions from date_input. Currently, they are only used in datepicker, but they seemed more general purpose. If you decide we should keep the current date_input API (in case anyone is using it directly), then I think it makes sense to factor these out in order to be able to maintain consistency, but otherwise they could be inlined into datepicker.jsx if you prefer."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the workflow back off.",
+      "reference": "I think this should never happen and should return an error also. Having `WorkflowBackoffTimerTask` with `UNSPECIFIED` type looks weird."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Add `browser` import"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "Would it be good practice to add a nonce in here (that's also stored in the config), so it's harder to tell when passwords are being reused?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "For consistency, the return type could be `TelemetryDataDto` here. This would be more consistent with the other REST API interfaces. From a functional perspective, the current code is perfectly fine though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I've never seen this `boost::make_shared`...why use it instead of `reset`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Wasn't this added as a part of different PR already?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the URLListData class.",
+      "reference": "hmmmmm, should not be in constructor in this case `$this->toDelete = [[]];`??? maybe not"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message to say \"Something went wrong. Status: {status}.\".",
+      "reference": "We can just update it to be as follows: `if response: print(\"Success\") else: print(\"Error\")`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe this should be exported so (external/third-party) plugins can also use it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to clear stale rules.",
+      "reference": "Warning logging whould be exactly here in high logic. So that everybody understands why we swallow errors"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to pass the url to the `JsonRpcUrl` method.",
+      "reference": "if its optional, move it to last item an use JsonRpcUrl? url = null"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the client model.",
+      "reference": "how is this different from the `client_slug` method already available on a `user`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "I'd keep this at `info` level..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I believe this env var won't be set anywhere. Do we need this condition?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this. I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "why add function explicitly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Is that intentional? If you don't create the cache here, it will never be created therefore used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the time.Now()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()",
+      "reference": "I think we can now remove this test case since we can ensure that multiple calls to `Fetch` will double the interval on each call"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Not part of this PR but this const seems to be defined in multiple places. Needs to be extracted somewhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Remove this file from the PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "need to add it for ropsten, rinkeby, goerli as well"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "G204: Subprocess launching should be audited (from `gosec`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "curious why only making these 3 public. what about other package scope methods like `times`, `timestamps`, `array`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is a list of exclusions for words or phrases where the original language has the same spelling in a given language.",
+      "reference": "The Email field is not translated into Russian, and into any other. It's kind of a \"standard\" word. Therefore, we may face the fact that you have to create files with exceptions for all languages. @caouecs, what do you say?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Should it say `default 0` here? looks a bit confusing. Also following BODMAS we should put: `2048 * (signature checker threads + 1)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should import ruamel.yaml from ruamel.yaml",
+      "reference": "Add a newline. We group by 1: standard library, 2: 3rd party library, 3: application library"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "So `queryRange.Step` will be ignored?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "It would be nice to replace these _HOST_* defines with HOST_*."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The problem here was that the record file started with something like `/tmp/whatever/myproj` and was scrubbed to `[ROOTDIR]/myproj`, but the `/` is a `\\` on Windows."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Don't use relative paths. src directory is already on the include search path"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "if we're introducing this now can we make this private?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make sure the file is not present?",
+      "reference": "Something is wrong with the indentation here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This should go to the external imports group below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `log.Println`.",
+      "reference": "Intended to be checked in?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we're using the old version. I'm not sure why we're using the old version.",
+      "reference": "I think this warning message is the same as above one. Anyway, it's fine to keep it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `LogManager.Configuration?.AllTargets.SingleOrDefault(t => t.Name == \"file\")`",
+      "reference": "This is done few times, replace with some well named method"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "`configs` isn't very descriptive, especially when there are other config-ish things like `generatorConfigs`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "In my point we have to check conversion with specific (non-ASCII) characters in unicode string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the tests.",
+      "reference": "Given that file still contains doctests (and should still contain doctests), they should be run. Please turn this back on."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "we should keep the camel case format - selfServe"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "consider the alias `compute` in case this ever references other apis."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "It probably doesn't matter in practice, but we're not supposed to access a map without holding a lock. This is why I have suggested using `m.Path(\"devices\")` earlier -- it takes a lock before accessing m.paths. Alternatively, you can leave this code as is but add taking a lock (same as `Path()`)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the module store.",
+      "reference": "Since `ga` is an acronym here, we should rename the generated actions and selectors to adhere to our naming conventions as it will no longer be capitalized properly. See below for how this is already done for the amp container ID settings. We should add `GA` to our list of checked acronyms as well in `packages/eslint-plugin/rules/acronym-case.js`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "uploading_finished and upload_meta_data_extracted can fire very quickly after another, and there is not much difference in the Assembly status that's useful to us. I kept only the Assembly fetch after metadata is extracted, which ensures that we'll have all the correct `uploads.*.meta` properties on the client side."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does it make sense to keep trying to read the file every time the function is called, or should we maybe use `sync.Once()` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`DbCapacity` -> `DBCapacity`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "For Berlin I confirmed all the fork hashes with the Geth team. Would you do the same with Martin? He responded quickly the last time."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does `sudo` required for `darwin` only? Don't we need it for `linux` too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `cloudformation` file.",
+      "reference": "Can you add description to this exported struct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `extend({}, component.prevState || state)`",
+      "reference": "Although this is needed for `getSnapshotBeforeUpdate` this also fixes a bug with `componentDidUpdate`. During rendering, the `state` variable is mutated. This has the consequence, that `previousState` would never hold the previous state, but the most current one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Should this maybe directly start with ELBv2 aka NLBs or ALBs?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "This was the request that was often causing the test to fail as an unexpected API failure (or at least one of them )."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I understand why `xhr = null`, but I think adding `error = null` implies that this method should work even if we don't pass the `error` argument. Should we remove it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It is not your code, and it is used like this all over the place in gapic generator, but the general rule is we should prefer using the least specific class/interface in the hierarchy, which still satisfies our requirements. Here, unless we really need anything specific from `ImmutableSet`, please use `Set` (less specific type) instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error",
+      "reference": "Sorry... I just realized... since we use sts_endpoint in the EKS Provider, this error message is no longer true. Role_arn is not required."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `Tree`.",
+      "reference": "(...), where each element ~are~ **is the** given {\\@code element}."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this can be an int because we have a default that is always valid, `0`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think you can use `build_stubbed` here for the same results but with more speed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "what if one of them is property and one is not?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to catch this.",
+      "reference": "> UI plugins swallow rejection errors so they don't end up in the console with no way to fix But it will still catch upstream in `addFile` and restrictions to show the informer?.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "can't this just be left undefined/null?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "changed bc we are using the `error` var below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the status code here.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason why this is change is in the same commit?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@nghialv btw, perhaps was this method originally created for copying the repo root to the given `dest` as a subdirectory?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Just curious - why not var?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `admin_page_googlesitekit-splash.js` file.",
+      "reference": "Why would we import this here and not use it? Is there a side-effect of this import?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the spec suite.",
+      "reference": "The name `errors` is a bit mis-leading -- usually I'd expect a field called `errors` to be an array of errors but here it's just a count. And it's not a count of _all_ errors -- it's a count only of some errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this bundle.",
+      "reference": "there was no usage of the bundle in the framework? everything works exactly the same after the removal?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why this difference?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Surround code issue. RequestError may not be null terminated when the RequestError size is less than the length of the string in p_buffer->errorText. Also, this can cause core dump due to segment violation if length of errorText is less than the size of RequestBuffer."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `AccountMaxVersionPrefix` here. I don't think we should have a `AccountMaxVersionPrefix` here.",
+      "reference": "`AccountMaxVersionPrefix` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "I see it is not part of this PR but I somehow overlooked it before. Can you use same import aliases as we use everywhere in the project: `apicommon` -> `commonpb` `apireplication` -> `replicationpb` `\"go.temporal.io/api/enums/v1\"` -> `enumspb \"go.temporal.io/api/enums/v1\"`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise exceptions.ReadonlyError",
+      "reference": "Nit: Maybe merge these into one string while you are here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Why make a new file for this? I think keeping everything related to the scheduler in a single file increases readability. Especially when there is no API-boundary in between. Functions like `getCoroutine` and `yield` also live in the normal scheduler files so it doesn't seem consistent."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "tiniest of nits: why would you abbreviate \"interface\" but not \"configuration\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.",
+      "reference": "Removing since all of the domain-neutral testing will be done in the new `Samples.MultiDomainHost.Runner` app"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "is there a better way to detect this rather than just always assuming it's cygwin if everything else fails? i think you can check `if sys.platform == 'cygwin'`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "duplicate code - can you move into build_from_path()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "very important test as we want to make sure the old name still work."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\"))))))))))))((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))",
+      "reference": "I think returning 1 should some how be moved in to specific support for LibreOffice.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))",
+      "reference": "Should be inside `ifdef X86` I would think (or moved to... I guess arch/x86/emit_utils.c)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Using sync.Map(key: nodename; value: state) instead of this \"EdgeNodes\" string slice here would be much better. Reasons: 1. Using sync.Map makes the time complexity of function UpdateEdgeNode and IsEdgeNode O(1), while using string slice with for loop makes it O(n). 2. Later we could be checking node state whether it's \"ready\" or still \"not ready\" by directly comparing \"value\" of sync.Map and doing the node state updating."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a regex for this. I don't think that's a good idea, but I don't think that's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit, does it make sense to get this variables outside the func where they are used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "to **an** Amazon... Simple Notification **Service** (singular)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Nit: is \"top\" a short name we use frequently? Seems a bit mysterious, and saves only 2 chars."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "This name is really confusing. May be just remove this const completely and hardcode `4` where it is used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why did you remove this spec?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The vendor prefix is still being used on Chromium based browsers like Edge Chromium and Chrome. Did you mean to remove this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": ".get will return None if there is no project_id key, so the or None part is redundant"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Do they need to be `internal`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Hit a flake here where I think there may have been some output to stderr that got mixed in with the output from Stdout. Hence switching to `Output()`, which does also capture stderr as `err.Stderr`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there any official CUDA API called cuMemcpy2D_v2?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Can you please move this interface as class in common Constants file in az-core module?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "Why not TempDir?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the view model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model model",
+      "reference": "IMvxFormsView -> IMvxElement is a breaking change, isn't it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to import molecule.provisioners from molecule.provisioners import openstackprovisioner",
+      "reference": "This should be imported alphabetically."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Please apply same changes as for Payment"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `DashboardEntityApp` so we don't have to worry about it.",
+      "reference": "This should only be used in the `ScrollEffect` component, as you have in the `DashboardMainApp` below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "I'd call it `g.auth_token`, just to make it more clear"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'd like to avoid this.",
+      "reference": "Not sure if this is what we really need, we might need to adjust this constant after more extensive benchmarking."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't we use `:branchname` here? Or just `:branch`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "`AutoTime` is a number but calling `int()` would make it crash. Tested through the docs"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@eddynaka Looks like the same block more or less 4 times, should we have a helper method? private void AddOrReplaceAttribute or something?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "Please do the same for the DebugFilter a few lines above."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Minor nit: Just inline both functions here. No need to make a file per function (that's a popular approach for some projects though, just not for us :) )."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "There are several uses of the word \"default\" in here, perhaps it can be reworded slightly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`function (` is correct. A space must be there. Please run `make cs` to have correct coding style."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this is now going to fail the scenario where there is a `main` with aria-hidden=\"true\". I don't think that should fail."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Is this specifically that if we capture the cast in another variable, even if it passes escape analysis, that the runtime will copy?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `cluster-api-provider-aws-`",
+      "reference": "Should this be optional for existing configs to work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "note that `balance` does not necessarily fit into `int64`, especially with the new bzz token. so you might want to avoid the `int64` conversion step using `big.NewFloat(0).SetInt(balance).Float64()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "lets leave out the `-S`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this method needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "How about, instead of reading the param every time, just add a class member variable to hold the value of the flag, and just set it once during `LayerSetUp`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Does this mean it's only returning tasks associated with the primary deployment? or something else"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "nit, would be good to include prefix for this log statement."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Same here, you should use a made up role. May I suggest `role=\"McCheddarton\"`? :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "@aokolnychyi, shouldn't this check whether the operation is a delete? If this is invoked by `DELETE FROM` then we don't need to validate conflicting deletes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Any reason to split up this import block? I think most files have them together in one block, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this?",
+      "reference": "`Tags.AppSecEnabled` should probably move to `Metrics.AppSecEnabled` I guess?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "What happens if you remove this? Can't you still initialize this atomic_file class, since it's just AtomicLocalFile with an additional method (move_to_final_destination)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "As previously discussed in #1944 it's not safe to remove IC like this as it will break every language that still has a `%{ic}` marker in the translation."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I believe these rules will be enforced both (1) on egress from a local workload, and (2) on ingress **to** a local workload. Right? I understand that we definitely want (1), but do we really want to enforce (2) as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `RemoteConnection` class.",
+      "reference": "Update after command rename"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What about adding an optional parameter that allows users to choose whether they want to use the format or not?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Lint didn't like this context being before the skip"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "so now basically anybody could drink my tequila? currently electron dev-env runs on `http://localhost:9080`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))(((((((((((((((( error error error error error error",
+      "reference": "`mPluginLoader` is nullptr in static plugins, which causes segmentation faults"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Better use `Optional> onSearch` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "this is asserted as invalid input"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Why do you need to create a new parser? Can't you just use `state.Parser` to answer this question?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "remove processing references from Nethermind.Core where possible, keep clean"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not make this a subclass of `MessagingException` so we don't need to change all `throws` clause?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed. I think it would be better to move this to the `drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_drbg.hmac_",
+      "reference": "it should instead be `from.hmac_drbg import DRBG` also, please put it at the bottom of the imports (PEP 8 order), so near line 36"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Nit: indentation is 2 indents (4 spaces) from the previous line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\")))))2)2)2)2)2)2)))))))))))))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),2),",
+      "reference": "I don't understand why this is changing to a hard-coded string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "nit: perhaps calling this `config` would be more clear?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to 'Uploading'",
+      "reference": "I would rather recommend using 'Wird hochgeladen' since the imperative form of 'Lade hoch' confuses me whether this is an action I need to do or whether it's an action that Uppy is currently doing. Just my two cents."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to 0027",
+      "reference": "Hmm I would have expected this to go away? What role does it play now that we have a minimum?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "if we are removing this, is it useful to have the `isGetMoreError` message below? If that's not required, can we also remove the `mongoErrorContextSymbol` outright?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "I think this mutex is only used here. Remove it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `index` class.",
+      "reference": "it's unclear to me which method you are recommending overriding?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))))))()))(()))",
+      "reference": "This make me think that if the typing of a variable is inconsistent it could cause problem. For example here, if `field == 0`, the behavior is not exactly the same. A `0` and is implicitelty false. Well it works because summing 0 is neutral, but what if it was a multiplication?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove this file from the PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "I cannot find the changes / results of the eip2565 benchmark"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "@tofumatt now that I see this in context, we're now resetting 2/3 of the keys in the `NewComponent` state - the other being `error`. It seems that `error` should probably also be reset - essentially resetting all of the component state when the date range changes. What do you think? cc: @felixarntz @adamsilverstein"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "This one and the ones below are for shutdowns but if it appears in some method called frequently during the lifetime of the process it should be cached in a static."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Better to just do `const err = yield User.bulkWrite(ops).then(() => null, err => err);` so you don't need to write out the whole `try/catch` block."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`action.ExecutionDataGas = 100`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@supersmile2009 please review. Is it right to mark this as legacy? Are we testing the legacy path here? Are there tests for the non-legacy path?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "getSpcResource should not be bothered about deletion. Can we have `separation of concerns` for this logic?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is actually matched with pandas's result since the output is sorted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "struct field tag `yaml:\"endpoint\"\"` not compatible with reflect.StructTag.Get: key:\"value\" pairs not separated by spaces (from `govet`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is not necessary. Topic inherits from DomainEntity which already has instance_handle_"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this test in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Do we need the forXDP parameter in runBpfUnitTest? If not, I think better to revert in order to save a few changes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "All the code that reference to this function must also be changed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a method, not a method.",
+      "reference": "How is this new interface different from existing `validateProxyUser` method? If I understand correctly the `proxyUser` parameter is essentially a group and the method should verify if `realUser` belongs to it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Do we have namespace conflicts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "We have several groups of caches so I think we should not use this shared configuration value for all of them. Instead of that, each cache group should have a separate configuration field, and the added `validation cache` should have its own field too. But this point, they can be fixed by `24h`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be removed.",
+      "reference": "This is a BC break for extending classes, it can't be done on 3.x"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Line length (PEP8, should be 80 chars max)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "this is duplicate now. I suggest moving it into `MimeHeader`, we already have a bunch of other headers there"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you expand the warning slightly \"Your password contains leading/trailing whitespace - in previous versions of rclone this was stripped\" Just so users know they might have to type their password without a leading space."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I think \"this\" should be \"parent\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Why not init this at variable decl time instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to parse the project id from env var.",
+      "reference": "Do we still need this if we're doing everything through `envconfig`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "I would like these options to have `experiment` prefix or suffix. Because we will be deleting them later"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Since we have the same logic in both forms, can we make a shared partial/helper for it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a new option.",
+      "reference": "Why to introduce this intermediate variable?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value.",
+      "reference": "Maybe use ChoiceParameter?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Not positive is this is needed, given the `TokenAuth` include"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a tuple.",
+      "reference": "Why not use a docstring for it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Two more tests - no ports specified and every possible port specified - p2pPort, graphQLHttpPort, rpcHttpPort, rpcWsPort, metricsPort, metricsPushPort, stratumPort"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add copyright to the copyright list.",
+      "reference": "Don't worry about that next time, it's automated :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `pytest.fixture(scope='session', autouse=True)`",
+      "reference": "No need for this, as pylint already only turns things off for this function and it's needed for the entire function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `AWSVPCHostValue`",
+      "reference": "Are these values expected to change over time? Why not inject these values in ECS backend instead of agent doing it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "as best i can tell, you are setting this here in order to make it available in `(e *ETCD) Snapshot(ctx context.Context, config *config.Control) error`. It feels wrong to pass state like this through an env var. Could you instead add a `nodeName` property to the ETCD struct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to keep this test framework.",
+      "reference": "These seem to support the new test framework below, but the `.in.csv` files are still committed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "!txReceipts[i].Removed and We can check it for first item outside of for loop, we don't expect mixed batches"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `github-url`",
+      "reference": "We can't unfortunately change any of our old flags :( it'd be a breaking change. Instead, we can keep both `githubURLFlag` and `repoURLFlag` and make the description of `githubURLFlagDescription` as \"(Deprecated) Use --url instead. GitHub respository URL for your service.\" It would be even better if we can make `githubURLFlag` as hidden but keep in the command. This way old commands will still work with `--github-url` but it won't appear anymore in the help menu."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This provides file and line number if applicable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this import is needed.",
+      "reference": "This is already imported. Please check the file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "One thing we can do in a follow up is use the shorthand calls, so You can just call `aSelection.unselect()` instead of calling the more verbose `execute()`. The fact that you have to check if the action is available sort of sucks though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I don't think adding this value to _every_ connection policy is needed or useful... why is this necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "adding this constrain for null AggreagateId is redundant"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why when current user is owner but still check access? Should we use `else if` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "60 seems high. 10? 20?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think this is not the best way to handle this problem. This way every relative path will be converted to absolute path. What if the user would like to move his config directory to a different directory?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `NetworkSpec` struct.",
+      "reference": "Let's make this a pointer given that's optional"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why is CircularJSON imported here? It is never used in this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure what this is for.",
+      "reference": "Should be ARM"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I don't see how removing \"open file bucket\" helps your purpose."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the version here.",
+      "reference": "Solr dependency was downgraded?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "or should we just autoload everything in `lib`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Prefer `Stream.anyMatch` instead of iterating over all slots."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the table. I don't think we should add this to the table.",
+      "reference": "create_tables isn't used in 2.0 (should probably be deleted?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "Now I start to wonder, do we want to have `80` as the default or `9090` (or depending on whether we are exposing it via `PrometheusExporterMiddleware` vs. `PrometheusExporterHttpServer`)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?",
+      "reference": "try an illegal case. and the result is syntax error."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Initialize `needs_reshape_` with true and call `Reshape` method"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is a _very_ complicated line. I'm not a fan of ternaries to begin with (although, I allow them in very simple situations), but this ternary has compound conditionals and would really need to be broken up. That said: if I'm reading this right, it sounds like this logic can make it where this lambda (which is called `RANDOM_ORDERING`) can make it not random and basically do the opposite of what it says. In general, it's good to avoid making methods or lambdas do the opposite of what they say."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We should remove this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I'm not sure why it's needed.",
+      "reference": "We should validate this, I think. To add a validator: - change `string` to, say `iface-pattern` - add a new `case \"iface-pattern\"` to the `switch` in the `loadParams()` function: - in that `case`, you should be able to use a RegexpPattern like the one for `iface-list`. However, you'll need a different regexp. I think this regexp should work: `^[a-zA-Z0-9:._+-]{1,15}$` i.e. 1-15 characters consisting of alphanumerics, colon, dot, underscore, hyphen and plus."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed with -local github.com/iotexproject/iotex-core (from `goimports`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Nit: Here we don't need the extra `this` in iceberg because we usually use the `this` to distinguish whether it is a member variable or local variable when assigning value."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "Why do we have that extra \"ENGINE-16002 Exception while closing command context:\" now? Is that done intentionally by us or where does that now come from?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Please don't use star imports, in the codebase we tend to use direct imports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Filename can be `config.functional`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Do we need to wait for the thread to be joined?",
+      "reference": "Should the thread join be done in the stop function maybe? I am simply wondering and sharing my thoughts. This is my thinking: * The join used to be done in the stop function of node class and now it has moved in the destructor. * The class state_block_signature_verification joins its thread at the stop function too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `walletCreateCmd` command. I think we should add it to the `walletListCmd` command. I don't think we should add it to the `walletCreateCmd` command. I think we should add it to the `walletListCmd` command. I don't think we should add it to the `walletListCmd` command.",
+      "reference": "don't use `init` function (from `gochecknoinits`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Simple Notification **Service** (singular)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((()))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "You are fixing the crash problem, and you have fixed it, so it won't crash anymore. So `crash_test` is not a proper name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "If this default doesn't depend on the argument, shouldn't it be delegated as the default for the no-arg version instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I did not use the new save_config_file method in here, because I am not sure whether this whole logic is still necessary? There is an TODO about it there as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why was this changed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think you meant, self.floor_thr = 0"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you revert these changes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Do we need to change this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should also set the memory update to 0 if it's enbled in kernel if it's enbled in kernel if cgroups.PathExists(path, cgroupMemorySwapLimit)) { cgroup.Resources.MemorySwap = uint64(configs.MemoryUnlimited) }",
+      "reference": "With this commit, `MemoryUnlimited` is defined as a `unit64`, so I think you can drop the redundant cast from this line (and the later lines which also have `uint64(configs.MemoryUnlimited)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "`props.totalFileCount < props.maxNumberOfFiles` makes the intent a bit more clear I think. And a check to see if maxNumberOfFiles even exists?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`epochNum` is a global variable (from `gochecknoglobals`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `grid.getRow()` function.",
+      "reference": "This needs to be fixed before we can accept the PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `socket_m` class.",
+      "reference": "Are these forward declarations needed if we `#include ` which includes the definition?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "can you use either `connectID` or `ConnectID` i would preffer `connectID`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `$crossSelling = []`",
+      "reference": "It seems like it cannot be null?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "should we consider add deprecated annotation here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why can't the implementor get the username from the config?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "@CoderZhi Please confirm if this change makes sense"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid error, but I don't think it's a valid error.",
+      "reference": "Do you think you can come up with a better message? :-) It looks like this is not used anywhere. So maybe just delete the line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "`tail()` is an expensive operation for certain collections"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "do we need to add this one in this PR?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "where is a test for it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why has this spacing been adjusted?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `api_class()` or `api_class(version=api_version)`",
+      "reference": "Sorry to do this, since you're touching this file can you resolve the pylint doc messages above?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `%s-%s-%s-%s-%s-%s-%s\" % (listen['user_name'], listen['listened_at'], listen['recording_msid'])`)",
+      "reference": "@alastair, because the `insertId` for two listens with different metadata and same ts was the same, only one of them would get written into BQ. A question is what would be the ideal way to write tests for stuff like this, so that this doesn't break again?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Wondering where this breaks btw (although pretty understandable)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "is this needed? 10 is already the default"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "One day we can try to allow the user to specify font sizes in something other than points. For now this is fine though..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "duplicated in both block of preprocessor condition. Can you join in one?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we put the first part of the expression inline with the `if(` for consistency's sake?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `GetProcedure` method.",
+      "reference": "Do servers have no need of accessing this information?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the formatTimeAgoText here.",
+      "reference": "It feels like this will break some stuff, but let it break. We need \"text\" version anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Here are two things I wonder: First, would it make sense to replace the TRUE here with \"leftExpr->getValueId().getType().supportsSQLnull() && rightExpr->getValueId().getType().supportsSQLnull()\". I'm not sure we have optimizations elsewhere that set the \"special nulls\" semantics back to FALSE if one of the operands it not nullable. Second, I wonder whether we have bugs elsewhere in the code that may not check for the \"special nulls\" semantics. For example, hash and merge joins probably can't use such predicates as equi-join predicates - one of the reasons for the optimization above. When I look at method ItemExpr::isAnEquiJoinPredicate() in core/sql/optimizer/OptItemExpr.cpp, I don't see a check for that. You have an example with a NULL value that is working, so hopefully this is not an issue, but I'm not sure how and why it works."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "This will cause someone writing a schema field like `inf:string` to get a pretty confusing error? If they intended to use `inf` as short for `information` or whatever :) Might it be better to keep it as `Identifier` and explicitly recognize the few identifiers we care about only when parsing values (not while parsing field names)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Mmm.... this affect #168 I'll need to research the collateral damage"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: refactor into a const map lookup."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to a new class. I don't think we should move this into a new class.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this is going to work. We need to get the actual assembly of the app project. @johnnywebb thoughts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to use_memoise=False.",
+      "reference": "@MSusik be careful about changing existing API. I think in this case you shouldn't rename the argument."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is bad. It is not a NULL-terminated string here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This probably should be @param string|false."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.",
+      "reference": "Unrelated test fix. Already in cordova34 branch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "validate() will be called by either V1 or V2"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "rather than generate code for this every time, stick it in `flatbuffers.h` (and call it `FLATBUFFERS_NOEXCEPT` to avoid clashes)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@AskAlexSharov @tjayrush, I'm still feeling uncomfortable with this change: - because it works by accident. For example in next lines `tx` object used as: `ReadBlockByNumber(tx)`. If you go inside `ReadBlockByNumber` you can find `!errors.Is(err, ethdb.ErrKeyNotFound)` - but ethdb.Tx doesn't return this error - and it satisfy `DatabaseReader` by accident - (I faced this problem last week - when passed Tx to place which expected Db - and I promised to change tx API - rename Get to GetOne or even remove the method). - we can merge this PR if it doesn't break things and solve problem of localDb use of RPCDaemon. But I will make PR now which will allow open Read tx by TxDb/ObjectDb - and will ask you to use it. Then will take a look how hard to change LmdbTx to not satisfy rawdb.DatabaseReader interface."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I think this means the file doesn't have a newline character at the end."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Hi Ramya, rather than checking here in the perf counter library, we should add the privilege check in the host_exerciser app."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be None if Python is shutting down.",
+      "reference": "Could you elaborate on this some more? Has this behavior changed with Python 3.8?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "Do we want to continue on logging the `dumpedBody`, if an error was thrown? It is probably an empty string. This would make the log after this one pretty much useless."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "the text here is derived from the object type and not getting properly handled by get text"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This will make other pods that run antctl will also connect its localhost? Maybe only do it when it's in antrea-agent and antrea-controller"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The corresponding action for this key needs to be removed as well, along with any unused translations."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Can't Span cannot be null anymore? I assume it was a useless check as there are discrepencies within integrations, but as you explicitly removed this one, I was wondering"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "hmmm, ok, this is interesting -> Lukasz definitely uses rewards traces"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why do we need this flag? can this be detected if the table is bucketed/partitioned and enabled/disabled automatically? Is this for backwards compatibility?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `if(*name == '$') {`",
+      "reference": "can you revert changes to this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "suggestion to add: An soc is a chunks whose address is derived of (...)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "It doesn't make sense. if we are going to have the profile page where the user can change the password and he / she is already logged in... I do not need to register a new username. only: new password..confirm new password..something similar...and \"USERNAME_ALREADY_REGISTERED\" only if I have a register page..are we going to have? We need to talk about it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));)-)-)-)-)-)-)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "not a great fan of this change - maybe worth splitting into CommitTree() and CloseBlock(long blockNumber)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Abort` method.",
+      "reference": "Ugh, if we're going to make a breaking change, I'd like this to be moved to ConnectionContext."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I was planning to add it as a common option, but there is a cyclic import for the rc & fs libs. Thoughts on avoiding it or should I remove this for now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this entry can be removed now, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I don't understand why you want to populate the storage class in this case, if the S3 docs say they won't populate the header in this case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `TIMEOUTS` or `TIMEOUTS`?",
+      "reference": "These are really meant to be the keys in the capabilities, not the keys of values within the capabilities"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should the last sentence be `If no region was found` rather than `specified`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Text.sanitize just removes images from names, for instance, the hardcore ironman symbol when someone talks. A better option would be text.standardize, or text.toJagexName"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "How about `ApplicationKindFromConfigKind`? And I think this function should be better in the config package. The reason is `config` package can import and refer things from the model package but not vice versa."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Nit: missing closing \".\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I believe it's misleading name for the condition. I prefer \"element_to_be_disable\" We can have a condition, when element is enabled but we can't click it, because another element overlays above it. So, If we use \"unclickable\" we might mislead people, who use that condition to verify if element can be clicked"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Same here. Should this be pipeline YAML file? Like `MarshalPipelineManifest`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log this in the log.",
+      "reference": "I will add this to my PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Again not 100% sold on the name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Use `m.Combo` for `Get` and `Post` methods."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason you're not using `self._die(\"The file {}...\")` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think we'll want @rickmanelius (or somebody) to go through all the help and make it more accessible. Probably later in the cycle. But \"Run a command in an app container\" doesn't do it for me :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in a separate file.",
+      "reference": "shouldn't this be a const?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "This is a bit of a throwaway field in the xunit output, it doesn't impact anything on EVG, should we just name it `integration` now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it's better to have a single thread thread.",
+      "reference": "Please change the name of the file too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.",
+      "reference": "line is 161 characters (from `lll`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "When is this false?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "note: also here ;)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not remove shutdown hook if we don't want to do that.",
+      "reference": "I don't think we need to necessarily check if that returned true or not, we should just remove the shutdown hook. Since nothing would check or do anything with this flag anyways."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "nit: blank between, for consistency."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "ditto for RDoc or YARD link"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I think it would be better to add a `logger.debug()` to the `logger.debug()` method.",
+      "reference": "This method is designed to allow the condition runner to tell users something interesting. The current `INFO` log level is correct."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future. I'm not sure why we need this in the future, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Again, would not change that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Is canceled considered failed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "These ineffectual assignment changes intrigue me. Our CI tests have been checking for these for months; how come the tests haven't been failing? How did you catch these?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should add an additional call to Recv() somewhere after here that we assert returns io.EOF."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this test is failing, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Why not return a `ctx` from `setupJournalBlockServerTest` and use it everywhere, like in the other test files? And maybe put a test timeout on it while you're at it? (Same for the other journal test files below.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "Do we need HeadlessSurface and DisplayPlaneSurface here too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a test for this.",
+      "reference": "Would it be appropriate for this to be a `MongoStreamClosedError`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `clientset` method.",
+      "reference": "Can you raise new issue that talks about refactoring webhook code. It should follow `idiomatic maya` patterns."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "(Probably repeating myself) Instead of `Datadog.Trace.Interfaces`, should we move this and several other files into a `Datadog.Trace.Decorators` namespace instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `require 'deprecation'` instead of `require 'deprecation'`.",
+      "reference": "Should we generate `gem \"rsolr\"` into the application Gemfile?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.",
+      "reference": "commit message, \"currently ignored\"? (-ed)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Same here. and all others."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "can we pass some simple interface instead of a full additional processor? (an imterface with these two events only)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Use a named constant"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a bug?",
+      "reference": "The `?` is unnecessary since `Assert.Single` will fail if it can't find the stop event."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this interface is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "What about providers that don't have a reliable location? Do they return null?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I might not be thinking about things right, but would it make sense for a MetricProcessor to have a handle on the ParentProvider kinda like how we do for traces? That way instead of calling `SetGetMetricFunction(this.Collect)` in the MeterProviderSdk you'd have a handle on the provider to call `Collect` directly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),).).).).((((((().).(((((((().).(((((((().((((((().(((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "nit: If we want to squeeze out a few more milliseconds from the startup, we may actually be able to remove this line (`wait_for_port_open(PORT_DYNAMODB_BACKEND, http_path=\"/\",...` should already be sufficient to ensure that the service is up and responding to HTTP requests). Thoughts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Convention is to use TEST"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "Just in case: remember to remove this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).).",
+      "reference": "I am not certain if this should be 0 or 7 here. I think a basefee under 7 is pathological"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "it would be better to move the declaration of the variable with its initialization at line 68"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this is required."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This rename should also ideally be in a separate PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `",
+      "reference": "Think this needs to go right below line 91. `parseResponse` can return `null` (line 133), which will cause this future to never complete."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Yeah, why not use this method instead of checking with `containsKey`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the time_backward to 1e-3) * 1e3 / loop_num",
+      "reference": "Compute `(time_forward + 1e-3) * 1e3 / loop_num` ahead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Mh... `MustBeRethrown()` above already logs `ex`, so `ex` will be logged here for the second time. I think this line must be moved to before `MustBeRethrown()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Since this never changes, why not pass it into the constructor instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/(((((((((((((()))))/((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "this is critical to avoid state root saving from beam"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "To make it more clear, `fill=self.num_classes`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Nit: \"ByteSize estimates the size in bytes of the message for the purpose of restricting batch sizes.\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the default number of threads for all endpoints. I don't think we should change the default number of threads for all endpoints. I don't think we should change the default number of threads for all endpoints.",
+      "reference": "It's weird to have this on the same level as kestrel. This needs to move to options."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "is it safe for us to use the `blob.type?.length` optional chaining with IE11 support? @goto-bus-stop"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "remove this debug statement"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should not be needed. 1) all 1.1 promoted extensions are marked as enabled when a 1.1 device is created (which happens iff both physical device support and apiVersion are set to 1.1) 2) The KHR and non-KHR versions of the bits are aliases of each other, so no different set is required."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I can see why you did it this way, but let's not get into the habit of passing information back via an environment variable. Add an element to `batch_job_info` instead, which is where we send back detailed info about jobs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a progress bar, it is a progress bar, not a progress bar.",
+      "reference": "Turns out my previous fix of doing `!dom.hasAttribute('value')` is not a good one as it leads to all input values always being updated. The new fix only updates it, despite `dom.value === props.value` when the value is `0` for progress elements."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why is this being added here? Is this relevant to these changes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to get rid of this?",
+      "reference": "This informational message is important to users. Please leave."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to submit a new FY16 funding request. If the need still exists, please submit a new FY16 funding request. If the need still exists, please submit a new FY16 funding request.",
+      "reference": "why isn't rubocop failing for single quotes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `SELECT * FROM product_workflow_status pws WHERE pws.product_id = p.id LIMIT 1 AS \"%s\"', $attribute->getId()->getValue(), $key ));",
+      "reference": "Is `WHERE` should `Language` param?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be a namespace.",
+      "reference": "ps - first letter from preview, when we move it into public it will not be relevant. my suggestion is spmd or ds(distributed)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Hm, should we show pandas' dtype instead of Spark data type?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "@reyang when exponentialhistogram arrives, we won't have any bits left for it.. unless we take Summary or make this 16 bits instead of current 8 bytes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "This change is not tested.. I guess this is how these taint-annotations work..?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Fails if obj is list. Please fix!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Could you add an assertion to make sure the `IncludeAllInstances` parameter is actually set and passed to the request?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))))))))))(((((())))))))))))((((((()))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "The name of this argument is not too intuitive. The point is, these kind of subprocess calls will return `str`s in Python2 and 'byte`s in Python3. It would be a lot of work to make CodeChecker handle both `str` and `byte` everywhere. Using the `universal_newlines` argument, we can force Python3 to return text rather then bytes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "These `Get`s are just cosmetic changes for consistency."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this test.",
+      "reference": "We should never skip unit tests, but instead fix them. Look at `pytest.raises` for cases where we expect an exception."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Do we need to call ToList here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think this can be moved into the model, at the very least, but I also think you might be able to do a has many through."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "could you please separate computations from string concatenation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))##############################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "@NiklasGustafsson - I had to make these changes for the x-ms-client-name extension tests for java and python. The tests were expecting wire format instead of the client name. Hence modified them appropriately. Let me know what you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2o_h2",
+      "reference": "Could we just set the list of header modification commands to `req->overrides` and apply them only when the request is sent upstream in lib/core/proxy.c? The reason I ask is because an upstream server (accessed using the modified headers) might return 399. In such case, the request would be delegated to the next handler. I think that the headers of the original request should be passed to the next handler, since per my understanding the intended behavior of `proxy.header.*` is to modify the headers passed to the upstream server only."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Table` struct.",
+      "reference": "Can we rename'refresh' to'read' and 'update' to 'write'? Until I had read more of the code below, I couldn't tell the difference between 'update' and'refresh'."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to log the error process. I don't think we should log the error process.",
+      "reference": "can we remove it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________",
+      "reference": "I take it that by the time we get here, colName has already been case-shifted to upper case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new header to the request.",
+      "reference": "Super clear desc - thx."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Ahh the correct fix is to call `collectLinkLibraries` on the SourceFile being compiled, not the module. Sorry for our mistake!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to False.",
+      "reference": "Can you also modify the `TestEnvironmentConfig` in `config_test.go` to cover this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a new method.",
+      "reference": "There's no point \"deprecating\" this interface method (the customer still has to implement the new callback that we have introduced which makes it a breaking change). I'd make an exception and simply rename it to `onResponse`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We chose `info` in the test code for obvious reasons. Changing to `finest` makes debugging harder and noisier."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think we should add support for multiple modules. I don't think we should add support for multiple modules, but I don't think we should add support for multiple modules.",
+      "reference": "I know this is not new here but we need to remove this global or protect access from multiple threads."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Doesn't seem any less confusing or error-prone to me. IMO the solution is to not use \"object\" in the enrich callback signatures. Type safety/compile-time checking is our friend!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think this should be `GOMAXPROCS=$(nproc 2>/dev/null || echo 2)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "Can we log if this actually happens."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a valid host.",
+      "reference": "This is not really needed, the line added in `GridNodeConfiguration.java` is what really fixes the `remoteHost` regression."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "It looks like the import format was only changed from one-per-line to all on one line here. Can we keep it as it was so it's easier to see what changed? It's also more consistent with how we format multiple imports in other components."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe call it `WireBridge`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Looks like `org.json.*` can be removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `widget` class.",
+      "reference": "remove the extra comma and newline"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the elements of a hash literal if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "Can we try to use Ruby 1.9-style hashes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Terminology question - these are called \"global options\" in the code, but the parallel non-global versions of these are called \"directives\"... Should this be `RegisterGlobalDirective`? Or does that have different semantics?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I do not care much, but you could as well just return bool(focusObject and focusObject.isProtected) here and avoid the if check? I know, really trivial."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I believe it's misleading name for the condition. I prefer \"element_to_be_disable\" We can have a condition, when element is enabled but we can't click it, because another element overlays above it. So, If we use \"unclickable\" we might mislead people, who use that condition to verify if element can be clicked"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do DiscoveryContext and GoGapicContext have a more specific common ancestor than Object? If so, let's use that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "is this the intended behavior now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.",
+      "reference": "Hunspell/C++ stems that a bit differently from Lucene, but in a controversial way, so I removed the check instead of changing the expectation"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to set the time.Unix(0, 0))",
+      "reference": "I'm curious why this is needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `Combat::doCombat()` function.",
+      "reference": "I do not see how that changes anything, as the target is operated on many times before that line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a sub menu, but I don't think it should be a sub menu.",
+      "reference": "Same user/visitor thing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `cmd.exe` file, so that we don't have to worry about the `cmd.exe` file. I don't think that's the best way to get the actual path to the script, so I'm not sure if that's the best way to get the actual path to the script.",
+      "reference": "This is not the correct path on all hosts. How can I correctly determine whether I will need to look in `Program Files` or `Program Files (x86)` for the script?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I think it would be better to move this try/catch block inside of the `FlushAsyncInternal` function as there are a few of places that can call it, eg event timer (here), AppendAsync, FlushAsync and CloseAsync."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to a new field.",
+      "reference": "should we set a smaller initial size to make sure that we exercise the growing logic in our tests?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "Let's add a new line at the end of this file, so that the last line becomes a valid line of code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why was this removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default for the log file.",
+      "reference": "I would prefer that this tool follow the driver framework conventions, which use OutputFilePath as an argument, take a look at AnalyzeCommandBase. You can propose changes to that if you'd like, but binskim, sqlskim, this tool should all conform (in the interests of building an eco-system with consistent command-line interface)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "(...), where each element ~are~ **is the** given {@code element}."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the instrumentation here. I don't think we should add the instrumentation here.",
+      "reference": "What if `AddOpenTelemetryTracing` is called multiple times?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Why is the condition of \"lastId <= wal _-> lastLogId() \" added here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`environmentID` is unused in MakeEnvironmentURL"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "Just hide the textview"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `PaymentVersion` field.",
+      "reference": "'Supports'? Very uninformative naming inside protocol. Why not just paymentVersion, or just recognise supported payment version from generic protocol version supported by the client."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "We should add an additional call to Recv() somewhere after here that we assert returns io.EOF."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "What is this used for?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "this is a breaking API change. Do we really need to do it in 6.2.0? Can't we just deprecate the methods?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should drop the table.",
+      "reference": "Is dropping the **Allergen table** necessary? Can't we just add the two new columns to the existing table using a raw query?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I'm confused why the expectations here would have inverted? Seems unrelated to topic stuff. Can you clarify?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I am very sorry that I neglected to resolve the conflict and did not fully unit test edge"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I think closeable should be handled by the concrete impl of a catalog and not by the base class, I don't think all catalogs must implement closeable by design. This should be done via composition rather than inheritance. Additionally, I don't know what the effect of this change is on other catalogs so this feels a bit on the risky side."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a bug?",
+      "reference": "Should this be `const`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we also add the Exporters here by using `DefaultConfig.AddExporter(...)`? At least the Datadog exporter that can't be configured from the command line..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@JaeseungYeom I believe you had set this in a previous commit to, by default, not train model1 when loading from ckpt. Would it work for you to have this as a command line option `--no_model1_train` instead of the default behavior?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this a real Ruby type?",
+      "reference": "@devigned, please clarify"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "File is not `gofmt`-ed with `-s` (from `gofmt`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Should we break this up into a separate line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should set this to true.",
+      "reference": "Why the override on the env variable, wouldn't we want to use the value set from Prow?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I don't see anything here that excludes people on a Team plan from from the revenue report. I see that TeamPlans are counted below, but the individual subscribers on the plan would still be included."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I know that we do not pull the last bit of performance out of the JVM but it is more robust and removes redundant code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `IllegalArgumentException`.",
+      "reference": "I'd make this a `throw new NullPointerException(\"registry == null\");` instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Does adding things here require us also to extend the FelixConfiguration resource in libcalico-go?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "does this need to be public?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Please import this from a pre-existing definition."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's a good option.",
+      "reference": "File name does not represent class name... if we ever cared for such things?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.",
+      "reference": "I don't mind the `make_spammer` route name. It seems to more clearly convey that the state of the account will change. The \"label as\" route name seems less definitive, as if one is simply adding something to the account -- a new label -- instead of changing the status of the account."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This exits if `-d` not specified which isn't exactly what we want, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.",
+      "reference": "So a `*` becomes `**`? How does this affect the query? If I have `csordas*marton` as filter and I have `csordas*marton` and `csordasFOOBARmarton` as run names in the database I get only the first as result?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I want to know in which situation you need to traverse from \"Timestamp\" data....."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: hasBytes should be hashBytes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "If I enable the clangsa analyzer with the `--stats` flag the checkers will be disabled even if they were enabled previously. I think we should check here if stats was enabled. `if'stats_enabled' in args and args.stats_enabled` we should leave them enabled."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Note that we probably should set the default gasPrice to `0.1 gwei` considering our minimum gas limit has to be 21k. At 21k the minimum fee would end up being `0.000021 ETH` which is just a little too high"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "So during a config reload, this function is invoked, but prior to that the o.TrustedKeys slice is set to nil, so this code would work. However, I am wondering what happens to s.trustedKeys, I am not sure this is handled at all. (same with the new map you are adding). I am not sure if this is supposed to be supported with a config reload, but just wondering if this is not putting things into a bad state."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think the logic should be to check for token len of 0 then check for token len of less than 2. The way the logic is now, it is hard to determine if it is empty or malformed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Nothing would change here even if this `if` statement were removed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it is a bug.",
+      "reference": "`sql` module is imported later."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to refactor the nms_thr.",
+      "reference": "I think it's strange, whether `assert cfg.nms.type == 'nms'` would be better."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Doing a quick search, it looks like there are other places that would be handling this promise rejection. How did you confirm this is not needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this test. I don't think we should change this test.",
+      "reference": "let's use greenland in the unit tests as well"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Please split this into two lines"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move the navigation controller to the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the bottom of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top of the top.",
+      "reference": "Is there any variable available instead of hardcoding 5?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the login login login login login login login login login login login login login login login",
+      "reference": "The onNewPasscode method was taking care of creating the user account. Now the user account will already have been created."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "This is really a minimum, isn't it, so `minPostWriteInterval` perhaps? IIUC it never gets used as a default, because the default IptablesPostWriteCheckInterval is 1s, which is larger than this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": "I wonder if you can use the controller's context instead of using it explicitly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.",
+      "reference": "Can you add this log for `baseline` too?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Let's call this \"NEW_BROADCAST_MESSAGE\". Msg.NEW_MESSAGE will be confusing down the line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the state files.",
+      "reference": "A better way to do this (in your future PR) would be to: 1. get rid of `TransitionDependencySet` altogether 2. tag `TransitionDependenciesMap` as `\"TransitionDependencySet\"` in JSON 3. update the JSON marshaler to deal with `\"TransitionDependencySet\"` tag. If it's a map, no big deal. Else, construct the `TransitionDependenciesMap` map. Doing that would mean that we don't need to have duplicate code, names for this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We should raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We should raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if the DataFrame has no rows with a non-null logical_key. We will raise an AttributeError or KeyError if",
+      "reference": "It's very error-prone to have so large `try` clause with such non-specific exceptions handled. Consider rewriting it with either of these: 1. Check that expected columns are present in `DataFrame` (`{'physical_key', 'logical_key','size'}.issubset(df.columns)`). 2. Normalizing output of query by using `COALESCE()` (or normalizing `DataFrame` itself?). Also it looks like a row with package metadata isn't used here, so might make sense to filter out it with `WHERE logical_key IS NOT MISSING`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Change to `DisableHTTPGit`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "org was not used in the mail content"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `catch` or a `catch` or a `catch`?",
+      "reference": "Is this gonna cause a lint issue, because of unused var? Maybe we should log it out?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "My understanding is that this will always be set to the actual containers IP, and never to the `DOCKER_HOST` IP if that env_var is set."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "this dependency to a callback also has to be a callback (eslint now warns us)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "directory name as well needs change.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why is the getIdentifier() call required here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary. I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Looks more appropriate to stick this in `AbsolutePath`.. actually that already has `FLATBUFFERS_NO_ABSOLUTE_PATH_RESOLUTION`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "this might interfere when we have multiple dashboards. maybe ActionBrowseTagline needs to be a Component so we can store the reference to the element on it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not cache it if it's archived data.",
+      "reference": "Should this be inside the `else` below and right after `CDebugf` so that we still get the logs?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Weird they don't expose the type for dynamo and this seems a pretty common error."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed. I'm not sure why this is needed.",
+      "reference": "@cijothomas I couldn't make the unit tests work without a way to destroy the ActivityListener we create internally so I return it as an IDisposable here. But we'll also need to also stop any ActivityProcessors/ActivityExporters on application shutdown right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "The default should be \"False\", as \"True\" would be a significant change in behaviour."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "since goal is to restore old_protocol, shouldn't we get it from pandas if possible? e.g. this will break if their source code changes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `str_replace('
	', $matches[2])`",
+      "reference": "This should consume less resources because str_replace don't need to assign arrays with all the values"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be printed.",
+      "reference": "It would be better to pass `param` as the second argument here, so that the parameter declaration is printed alongside the type. Same thing for the changes in `ffi.c` and `lambda.c`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Do we need to set the members to final like submitTime, submitUser...? They are only used by getter method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "That makes this error message incorrect; if someone has extended Cms\\Classes\\MediaLibraryItem, then this error message will read \"Class My\\Classes\\CustomMediaLibraryItem has been deprecated\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Is it worth injecting the whole configuration object for just one setting? Would it be more generic to pass an $options array with the override_from in it? I'm not completely opposed to passing $config, but since we've avoided it so far, it seems like it would be cleaner to maintain that separation. Simply adding a getOptions method to the factory would make this a lot more readable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `SPI0_MOSI_PIN`, not `SPI1_MOSI_PIN`.",
+      "reference": "Just curious: where do these pin numbers come from? I see you took the SPI0 pin numbers from the Arduino board layout which is good, but I can't find such a relation for `SPI1`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to",
+      "reference": "Isn't that already too late? I'd expect, that the LinkageError occurs the first time, we have the class instance (the classloader tried to load the class) - or do we get a partially linked class back, and we get the exception when retrieving the methods?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "nit:s/Traceparent/traceparent/ - As per the spec header name is all lowercase."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We need to have unit tests for it since it is now a public function. Also I'm not a fan for making this movement since `relPath` doesn't consume any info in this pkg."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "We generally avoid wildcard imports. If you feel like changing it back, great. Otherwise, no big deal."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "We also have a typo on the line above! OUt or Out?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the view_request_cta method.",
+      "reference": "OH! These are text.... (Ignore above)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "How was this set before? Was it just ignored?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we `save!` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this. I'm not sure how to fix this.",
+      "reference": "sizeof(port) seems ever-so-slightly clearer."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed. I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Not sure if this has been discussed. I wonder why SourceGroups and DestinationGroups are not in From and To NetworkPolicyPeer as NetworkPolicyPeer already describes the source/destination of the traffic."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to re-parse the `--mode` and then re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` again. I don't think we need to re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode` and re-parse the `--mode`)",
+      "reference": "This doesn't account for `:bind --mode caret...` (i.e. `--mode caret` instead of `--mode=caret`; both work). Do you see an easy way to make that work?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this change.",
+      "reference": "Is this map used for durable state anywhere? If so we probably want to keep ConditionFailedError as 2"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "You can use `http.MethodHead` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is needed.",
+      "reference": "And another empty test. Please remove until there's content."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error error error error error error error error error error",
+      "reference": "You really didn't need to do any of these, we need to remove the API client from source eventually anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "seems pretty strange here because TiSession contains PDClient."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "I created a test method for this scenario. Would you normally split it out like that or bundle this into one of the existing test methods? I'm more accustomed to creating lots of separate `it` blocks in nested `context` blocks in rspec"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "should it be `newsessionqueue` or `newsessionqueuer`? In case we'd like to be consistent"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe add `@lucene.experimental`? We are exposing (slightly) internal details about `IndexWriter` so maybe we need to reserve the right to change this API in the future..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@johnduarte I know this isn't part of your code change, but it seems to me that this `curl_with_retries` is not necessary. If the `retry_on` host command is successful, isn't puppetdb ostensibly listening to the ssl port as well? What do you think about removing that `curl_with_retries` after the `retry_on`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Does an empty struct really take less storage than a bool? I guess it must be, or else you wouldn't have changed this, but I'm curious about the detail."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "nit: This should perhaps be called `waitForAndReportSelectionChange`, as it affects braille as well, not just speech."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: I suggest that we rename `tag_error_response` to `tag_resource_success`, as later in line 132 we're returning an error if this value is *not* truthy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the styleguide.php file.",
+      "reference": "I am missing return typehint"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model. I don't think we should add it to the model.",
+      "reference": "_base_ ='retinanet_pvt-t_fpn_1x_coco.py'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should remove `throws Exception` here, since we're catching it anyway and triggering `onAuthFlowError`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "a super thin wrapper like this makes me think we should consider not having it, instead just defining in the plumbing.api the publisher and subscriber interfaces we expect a ps dependency passed in to support and then to pass calls directly to that thing rather than through this wrapper"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "Waiting for the pull takes a long time. This message informs the user that at least one of the images being pulled is available. Please leave."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice, but I'm not sure if it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "We should set a 1.7 upper bound for this as well. :smiley:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\");\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "Lodash mixed in with WordPress dependencies"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "perhaps we should test that users cannot edit the profiles of others?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "Does this mean the content changed with the new pyopenssl version? Is Wireshark already compatible with this new format?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.",
+      "reference": "line is 147 characters (from `lll`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to false.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps move this option into a separate speechViewer section, as we are planning to also save position information as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `SegmentProductsQueryInterface` class.",
+      "reference": "This is not a segment responsibility this query should be in exporter-File module"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Did you measure the performance with and without this option. Do we want to export fixits even if the `clang-apply-replacements` tool is not available in the user's PATH?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What if we do not change this file? Are we using this `pkg/disk/v1alpha1` elsewhere for block device requirement?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "regarding dropping the port/host/uri methods on Nod: this would `options[:port] = target.port if target.port`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Why do we need this utility?",
+      "reference": "good question - I vote we just remove, up to you if you want to handle in this PR though. (as it would require changing the places you call it; maybe moving the test? Though my guess is if we don't now, we never will."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is so that if we turn on bundler caching globally it still won't affect python etc. Same inheritance logic as for the cache slug."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "[You can ignore it] Maybe a better method name would be IsSupported or HasSupportForAllocation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "Why is this changed to `\\*`? The behavior of the code on line 42, shows that `*` is what's handled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this should either return `-1` or throw. I think my vote is on the former."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the timeout to 5 seconds. I think we should change the timeout to 5 seconds.",
+      "reference": "I am confused, I've read 2, 3 and 5 seconds in various places"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Any particular reason you chose int64 instead of int? This requires adding type conversions throughout the code below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "this string should really be a local constant. it's repeated below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Number types are hard. Should we be considering byte/sbyte? What about unsigned variants that would otherwise fit in a signed 64 bit integer like UInt16, UInt32?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`Assert.True(true)`... xunit used to have Assert.DoesNotThrow"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should this be an env var like the other `S3_*` values?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((///////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "If you do go this route, I think it would be worth adding a note here that IE 11 is the only reason why we're not using the more obvious `node.remove()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "The added text doesn't really match why it's possible. Maybe it would be better to name that as a separate case for this checker? (e.g. dict lookup is quicker than list comparison)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "just whether we are not missing some doctrine extension because above this attribute is nullable position and it shows int instead of int|null but maybe for lvl2 it is OK"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Prefer `Stream.anyMatch` instead of iterating over all slots."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": ":grimacing: yikes, thanks for catching this!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `MvxViewHolderBinded`",
+      "reference": "`Binded` is weird. I think it needs to be something with `Bound` in it (and drop the `Mvx` bit) like `ViewHolderBound` or something."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "can we have String() and GoString() implementation of `apis.CStorPool` struct to pretty print it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Like I said, please replace by `EXPECT(kTokenString)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Will you please update the copyright message to `2021` for classes that you modify?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `filter(entity)`",
+      "reference": "Is there a better way to filter these other than relying on the hashKey. I few like this might now be trustworthy in the long run. If angular ever removes this property, this feature would be broken."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "No need to check dynamo_exited"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file. I don't think that's the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "from linter: >method SetTlsCACertificate should be SetTLSCACertificate"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this annotation to the test.",
+      "reference": "this data had incorrectly aligned timestamps (which wasn't the point of the test)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return the user.",
+      "reference": "Since this is workflow agnostic, should we put this in common?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "using the `@abstractmethod` decorator wouldn't be better?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "to the entity))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))))))))))())()))())())())())())())())())))()()))((())))((()))))(((((",
+      "reference": "This was crashing the app during EDIT on boolean Doctrine Embedded properties"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Will this be backwards compatible with the previous path?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `IScope CurrentScope` instead of a `IScope CurrentScope`",
+      "reference": "what is potential use for current scope? It seems you'd only want it to stop it. But if you get current scope you never know if it's yours to stop - i.e. this is not safe or correct to stop current scope. So I wonder should we even try to expose it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think this is likely the only additional change needed on the original PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"))\"))\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Please revert changes to unrelated file"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Connector` class.",
+      "reference": "Can test use a Mockito mock instance instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This check is usually not recommended.",
+      "reference": "Bit of a shame about these multi-line strings in annotation parameters - they're not a deal breaker but just make the diff noisier"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this. I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "we can remove this one as this is not used any more"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "we don't really need an extra error flag"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "any chance you could just fix the processors plugin?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should use_depthwise=False here.",
+      "reference": "We may keep this config unchanged since `use_depthwise=True` by default."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe add i#956 in this log as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be a `InventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventoryInventory",
+      "reference": "if (StoreInbox* storeInbox = getStoreInbox()) {"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "what is this, is it going to be used later?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "@anodelman test failure is probably due to this, needs to be fixed to `(\"Host #{host.name}\")`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `cart-comments-container` class.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure that we need this anymore, but that can be a separate discussion."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "The formatting seems different from the rest of the code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could we have a unit test for this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: put params in new line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think you should remove the icon from the menu.",
+      "reference": "The button for the date range selector has incorrect width since it has `padding-right: 8px` which sets the width to: `44px`. Can you review to make the button `36px` on small screens as per the AC?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This should be inside the set routine IMHO: matches the others; all callers need it; simplifies code here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "MAX_RETRY_TIMES makes much more sense."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`saveSession` allows easier mocking - just save function which You need, instead full interface"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Bucket` class.",
+      "reference": "No docs for the new param here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this file should not be renamed.",
+      "reference": "This file is unrelated to the aims of this PR. Please remove. If it is needed to demonstrate Sonar Deltas then it has been proven and can be removed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "minor: `Export all ended spans to the configured Exporter that have not yet been exported.` - This is the spec description. Lets use something on that line. \"queue\" is not necessarily present for all processor."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "is this deliberate? or testing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I want to get more perspectives regarding this one. Making it `readonly` makes me feel that we're assuming the head should never change, and my worry is that other code might assume it (e.g. they might cache the value and assume it will never change). While this is true for now, I guess in the future we might want to support something like `PrependProcessor(processor)` or `InsertProcessor(index, processor)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "This isn't critical for test coverage, but it seemed off that we had disabled wrapping the reader."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please remove Descriptors3D from this file. We just did this in master."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "You could pass the MetaClient instance in ctor, and create a new instance if nullptr."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))))))((((())))))))(((())))))))((((())))))))((((())))))))((((())))))))(((())))))))(((())))))(((s(((s())))))))))(((s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s(s.d(s(s.d(s(s.d(s(s.d(s.d(s(s.d(s.s.d(s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s.s",
+      "reference": "What does this do? Seems like a poor mans mutex/semaphore?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is a breaking change, and cannot be made. We have committed to this API for v1."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can also drop corresponding types from docblock here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This change is unhelpful to users."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "why is this variable introduced? Please stick `_o.Test3.A` directly in the call below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the middlewares.",
+      "reference": "do you mind sharing what is the reason for this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to redirect to query_proposals_path(text: \"status:completed\")",
+      "reference": "thoughts on putting `alter_query { |rel| rel.limit(@closed_proposal_limit) }` in a method that we can call here? That way we can have a test for this logic without needing a controller spec."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps `@node` throughout"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this default be 'normal'?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: type this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "These command names are specific to Chromium-based browsers. Please move to `ChromiumDriverCommand`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "lets print nodeName that got passed also"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `int`",
+      "reference": "Should be `if sys.version_info[0] > 2:`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Is there any need to pass this through `string_metric_parse`? I believe you can either create an off_t or just pass 0, with no need to added a string conversion into the mix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Let's not use a form of hungarian notation in naming our variables"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `H2O_PROBE_CONN` function.",
+      "reference": "Seems like we are calling the probe twice?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think we'll want @rickmanelius (or somebody) to go through all the help and make it more accessible. Probably later in the cycle. But \"Run a command in an app container\" doesn't do it for me :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Have not tested this yet, lets see if tests complain, but I suspect it should be as easy as this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "no big deal but we don't we just use a list to keep the order? I don't think it's likely to have a duplicated columns if that was the concern."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "See above, same for all similar cases below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be true.",
+      "reference": "where is this coming from?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it, but I'm not sure if it's the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We can also drop `plans.includes_screencasts`, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "wouldn't `int.to_bytes(counter, 32, 'little')` be equivalent, clearer and faster?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to validate that the condition is a payment condition and has the right values. I don't think we should validate that the condition is a payment condition and has the right values. I don't think we should validate that the condition is a payment condition and has the right values. I don't think we should validate that the condition is a payment condition and has the right values. I don't think we should validate that the condition is a payment condition and has the right values. I don't think we should validate that the condition is a payment condition and has the right values.",
+      "reference": "I don't see why this is in porcelain since it's just a free function, with no dependency on plumbing or the `a` receiver. I think it should be moved to `protocol/storage`. It's exposed unnecessarily widely here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should drop messages if we don't drop messages.",
+      "reference": "Could we only do this for all time? Because that's what is causing problems rn?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This looks better than before, but we'll now likely run into issues with `'` characters in the spec. Maybe we can just use `manager.call_strings` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Should this replace `splitSize` instead of adding a parallel call? The `SparkReadConf` is not yet released, so we can change it still."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "To reduce complexity, please use OSError on Python3 as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "That seems wrong."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((-(------------",
+      "reference": "Yes, this is needed here. This is a builtin user who just reset their password."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This seems to move the storage of temporary files to the CWD. Is that right? I don't think we should do that. If the process gets interrupted, we should try our best to clean up, but if even that fails, it'd be nice if the mess was left in a different directory. Maybe we should have a directory explicitly for builds?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "Please explain why a user would enable this (space savings), and the requirements for this option to be safe."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a `hasFinishedResolution( 'getAccounts' )`",
+      "reference": "I think the `undefined` checks still need to be removed from here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there any particular reason to have 6?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The biggest chunk does not guarantee that it contains the biggest CIDR-aligned range. If we don't care too much about a few CPU cycles being wasted, then I'd suggest to merge the if-statements."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this. I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "instead of doing the if err := __; err!= nil { return err } thing, you can do errs = addErrs(errs, ___). If you want."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the CLI. I don't think we should add this to the CLI.",
+      "reference": "nit: Is this error message accurate?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Ouch! :man_facepalming: And of course, this worked for me because that evaluated to false when I was testing the bare-user path."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Parentheses aren't needed here. `if len(statusParts) > 0 {` will suffice."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "// the test is skipped on given servers because it will fail."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The name of the test should be updated to \"it'should return bad_request if api key is invalid\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an exception if jobInfo.cancel is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1 and the jobInfo.workerCompletionMsg is 1",
+      "reference": "Use `==` in this case instead of `is`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Please put it like this: `CStorPoolPhase is a typed string for phase field of CStorPool`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "variable must be in camelCase => $newStock"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "unnecessary conversion (from `unconvert`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the next line.",
+      "reference": "... is probably automatically vectorized, since it has the same speed as `System.arraycopy`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Is there anyway to get rid of the global variable, if it is specific for each task, can you add it to the `mtask` struct?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Surprised to see this old syntax here, but not _that_ surprised."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `@SuppressWarnings(\"unchecked\")` and not `@SuppressWarnings(\"unchecked\")`.",
+      "reference": "It is good to mark it! Maybe we can remove the method for Vavr 1.0.0 - but for now it can stay as-is. Thx!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error log.",
+      "reference": "exported func New returns unexported type *pool.pool, which can be annoying to use"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Sorry, I feel like I'm missing something - where does this get called?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "@guihecheng Thanks for the fixing! Actually this is not the dup codes, when we first registerNode, then update the nodestatus immediately, or the node will keep not ready for 10s. And do you have other ways to refactor it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "How portable is this? (e.g., Windows). I'm relaunching tests of windows because they failed for other reasons."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "What this does is narrow down what we are saying the descriptor set is requiring. This is a good thing, but doesn't go far enough, we are still potentially setting unused bindings to either a required state or an invalid one. set_binding_pair.second is a map of the binding/requirements from the bound shaders... and instead of marking all bindings, looking at that will mark only the used ones. Will open a new PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should use `codes.InvalidArgument`, same as above line 1033 and 1036"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Please revert this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Probably in another PR, I think the package should be renamed to `servicebus` to be consistent."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future, but I don't think we should have it in the future.",
+      "reference": "curious: are we planning to add link to each of the rules in the message?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "line is 123 characters"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `$user`",
+      "reference": "same here; `@param array $user Array of user data`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "A quick read of this test indicates that we're changing the behavior of this api, and so the test needs updating. Is that right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Register needs lowercasing"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a boolean.",
+      "reference": "This should belong to FlowContainer class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I think there is a chance that on disable/enable cycling, referring to `self.window` is problematic. In the `__init__` method `self.window` is set to None. If `__init__` gets called before `_run` exits the `while` loop then we wont call `self.window.destroy()`. Can you use non-instance variables after this point? I don't think `self.timer` is used outside this function, if so, then I'd prefer it also be a local variable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `errorcheck` instead of a `errorcheck`.",
+      "reference": "I was confused by this env name variable, assuming it was the value, not the name. Silly nit, but maybe name it noninteractiveEnv?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to \"overwrite\".",
+      "reference": "nice, having the \"overwrite\" default makes this change backwards compatible, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It doesn't make sense to accept all 2xx status code. For example, `203 Non-Authoritative Information` or `205 Reset Content`, etc."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ( ( ()))) ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (",
+      "reference": "Found a better choice here that doesn't involve object creation: StringHelper.startsWith()"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't we consider the situation where it doesn't find a plugin?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Do not understand why this needed for table. All new classes defined in the `preview` namespace."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Kept the same property value even though it is now in Common to avoid breaking existing clients."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "TODO: this is temporary until we figure out case sensitivity for metrics evaluators."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "can we just kill this TODO?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This appears to be a change in error handling due to a dag upgrade."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "These changes look like a hosts file _must_ be provided?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))))(((()))))((((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "@akohlmey Just make it a cast like the others. I dislike it either way, but that's the price we pay for Python 2 support."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `build_config` file.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if the default here should be nightly? I won't block on that though just a question for a follow up."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Also not for merge to master."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit `non-standard` might be a bit subjective - maybe \"Cron schedule {blah} is in an unrecognized format. Dagster cron strings must consist of five characters separated by a single space chacater\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "ARM emulator gets tripped up on the copy/paste menu when tapping the text. Tapping on the text field isn't necessary for setting text."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "extra word lookup removed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Will you link to {!webdriver.promise.Promise} here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to redirect to pages#show. I don't think we should redirect to pages#show. I think we should redirect to pages#show instead of pages#show.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "@AdrianLxM finally found some your bug too :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This crashed in an app using descriptor_indexing with some unbound descriptors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I think we might want to keep these marks separate? Then we can create a new `workflow` file with 3 jobs: 1) Prime stdlib 2) Prime batch 1 of external 2) Prime batch 2 of external"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Throw `fragInfo.CachedFragment.ViewModel.GetType()` into a variable so it's not evaluated each time."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]",
+      "reference": "Rather than just getting rid of the memoization maybe we should use an `after_save` filter to set it to `nil` so that it will be recomputed on next read?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "JS abstraction leaks so this should be `if (el.parentNode!== null) { el.parentNode.removeChild(el) }` @developit"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: change it to `Exchange: unexpected status 0x%x` so that we'll know where this issue came from as well as making it easier to decode."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is an implementation of MultiYamlFetcher.",
+      "reference": "Name of constant is not appropriate. Name of constant should make use of version no. as suffix. The constant can be a typed string versus a string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "@glennsarti you want to validate this on Windows? IIRC this won't work"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "ps I'm ok to add this as a elasticsearch property instead. ex zipkin.storage.elasticsearch.names-lookback (we have similar things in cassandra)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Curly brackets here `{ (breakLine) xx (breakLine)}`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a boolean, not a string.",
+      "reference": "Can you check this case Assuming you have a dashboard with 2 users, test1 and test2 Currently logged in user is test1. You should not be able to change it to test2. You open dev console and paste in `countlyGlobal[\"member\"].username = \"test2\";` then you enter value test2 in the input and it is allowed and form would be submitted. Would server side validation deal with such case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a a a a a a a b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b c b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b c b b b b b b b b b b b b c b b b b b b b b b b b b b c",
+      "reference": "since we're changing this class, let's fix the default class name as well. it should be com.mysql.cj.jdbc.Driver"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "At load time, we ensure the config'd objects exist."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `InvalidOperationException`.",
+      "reference": "Is there a test for this case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `show_more` function.",
+      "reference": "This copy doesn't match what I had in my mockup. I think it's better to call them episodes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "For some reason it worked for frontend even before this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Can we encapsulate this in a function so if we want to change it against we don't have to change all call sites?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe a good opportunity to do a related improvement: The parameter `total_blocks` in `bootstrap_attempt::process_block` shadows a field with the same name, so maybe rename the parameter to `total_blocks_a` The parameter and field are incremented at the same time, but the field is used by `populate_connections` as well, so I assume they mean different things. Other than that, LGTM"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Please revise the naming of these two flags. _**default**_ is the value we take when user doesn't provide. You could infer from the fact how `default_parts_num` are used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I don't think we should have separate \"transformer\" and \"generator\" terms. I would suggest renaming this existing class `ImportTypeTransformer` to `StandardImportTypeTransformer` and renaming the interface `ImportGenerator` to `ImportTypeTransformer`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I believe `tag-matchers` is the proper form for this filename. Only components should use pascal case, I believe everything else should continue to use kabob-case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "same here, move this one down"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `OrderDataFixture` class.",
+      "reference": "Some could be created as superadmin instead, to add more special cases. Also, the reason behind this change should be described in the commit msg and the PR description."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to import koalas as ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks ks",
+      "reference": "Is this required?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`--public-volume-create-allowed=true` and set the default to `true`, then use `!c.Bool('...')`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Could we use `0x7ffffffe` instead, since `INT32_MAX` is an ID of a _pull_ stream? Other than that the PR seems ready for merge. Thank you for working on the fix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Might as well add a docstring for the new `exit_code` parameter too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`poll` and `remove` have different meanings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it's better to create a new one.",
+      "reference": "What's the perf impact of writing bloom filer? Does it make sense to enable it by default if the perf impact is minor? Would be nice to include benchmarks?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove `HIP_UNSUPPORTED` - it is an alias"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "i think we should return an empty list instead of null here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Is it really necessary to store them in a new setting? I think it should be enough to store the credentials in `ProxyConfig.direct()`. Then AntennaPod does not need to store multiple different proxy settings. Also, it will not change existing users' settings (currently the proxy settings would be lost on upgrade)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This is a mess. Can it be broken out as a separate function using ifs and return statements, which would also make it more debuggable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This stuff is a bit ugly and should probably become a utility. The main problem is that ``.map`` is being abused a bit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Maybe there is a better way here so that we don't even bother triggering a storage query since we want an empty list here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "just curious, `region` is not used in the AWS IAM client, afaik. But I see this is a general field for clutch clients, is it just ignored internally?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "Why are we doing that change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not enough information for us to try to rebuild an error",
+      "reference": "Why && changed to ||?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the `collection_to_single_partition` function.",
+      "reference": "can you please change this to `_collection_to_single_partition()`, like we've done for alll other helper methods defined in this module?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a service container?",
+      "reference": "This class is never used, don't import it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Missing a `return`. Either way, I think it's better to add a `#if DEBUG throw;` in the catch block instead (so we keep the log in debug mode)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Files should have an extra line at the end of them."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I think we could replace this (well the backing field) with `BlockingCollection` when we drop NET35?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should drop columns if we don't have them.",
+      "reference": "Can you show before/after output in the PR description? From a cursory look, seems like it will just drop the duplicated column which isn't consistent with pandas' results."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to check_deprecated_config here.",
+      "reference": "Added validation that `config: transports` isn't used @adreyer @katelopresti Curious what you think about having Bolt link directly to the docs site."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "This probably isn't needed anymore now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend.endend.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.end.......................................................................................",
+      "reference": "Would it be easier to kick this import to the top of the file? It'll get stripped out anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a private method.",
+      "reference": "are you sure that the privacyGroup cannot be null?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list.",
+      "reference": "Wrapped with list"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a function.",
+      "reference": "Please move this to `pkg/stats/v1alpha1`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/",
+      "reference": "a small nit pick...this can go into `lib/patterns.rb`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The above TODO is no longer necessary I believe"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why is this change required?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This really is an excerpt. ;-)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return true here.",
+      "reference": "@acud The reason why the default is now `true` is because the chunk must be in the neighborhood of the storer peer with this change. The majority of the tests expect a valid receipt so the closest peers in the tests must be in the neighborhood. As of writing this, there is only one test that expects a peer to be out of depth."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This is what breaks the build. Apparently w/o this line, `sqlite` package is not even compiled. With this line it gets compiled but compilation fails because we don't use CGO for our production Linux builds and > ***Important: because this is a `CGO` enabled package you are required to set the environment variable `CGO_ENABLED=1` and have a `gcc` compile present within your path.***"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This should be all slots"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Need to add deprecated annotation and call the new fixed method to avoid the API broken issue."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This was just fixed in mozilla-mobile/android-components#4892. @pocmo is cutting a new Android Components 19 dot release today, so you'll be able to jump to the new version and restore the build type."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "Leaving this log line because it helped me to diagnose that the reconciler client was using a different cache than the event sources, so not always seeing the injectable that triggered the reconcile."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Do we need also to protect access to `mset.js` and `mset.jsa` or even `mset.store` down below? (not sure if those are immutable or not)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "I'd rather you do this under `if info.filledInMerkle {` since that's the only place it's relevant."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "*NULL_DEREFERENCE:* object `leaderUrl` last assigned on line 348 could be null and is dereferenced at line 351."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Since the IdentifierScheme's don't change without us making additional code changes, perhaps this should be added as a constant as we previously did with Perms?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: We can revert this now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\"))\"))\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Oh, that's the reason why you have two different data structures here. Does the order of the `selectedItems` list matter? If not, I think it would be more clear if both would be a Set."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Should be named getDescription, since the other description functions are named that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Neo2`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````",
+      "reference": "Don't we want to do this for g2 4k also?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I would prefer if we don't add this package as it's unsupported, and I expect not necessary. Node buffer supports many formats - is it not possible to use one of its helper functions to load the content?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this is used any more, please remove."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a list.",
+      "reference": "actually use type_name=print_config_type_to_string(self, with_lines=False) to populate this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "We should be using dependency injection here, instead of fetching the config factory at the last minute from the container. That would allow us to more easily overwrite the \"delete_local_resource\" setting in tests."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "everywhere else in the project, `LOGGER` is used"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Why is this value set to \"min_by\", and what are the implications of it? Does `&:to_f` play nice with semver (e.g. 1.2.0)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "typo --> gloabl"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Wanted to double-check: does the `log` middleware still set its own \"empty\" value (should default to `-` at least for the default log format)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "It would be better to just change RWD to throw IllegalStateException if you attempt to execute a command after quit (unless it's a second call to quit())"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this going to be configurable? If not, it should just be removed for now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Maybe just one import line - `from collections import OrderedDict, Mapping`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Btw this class probably doesn't belong in PMD. It says it's there to test UIs, but arguably UIs can use their own test fixtures, and this in in src/test so probably not even shipped anywhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Maybe we can group each `finishResolution` call with the corresponding `receiveGet...` call? That would make the connection more clear when reading the code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Can we take this out of the constructor here and just use the config value? (This would also make the other proxy mode cases obsolete)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please flip the conditional to be `if (field.required) {... }`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `User.last.email_address`.",
+      "reference": "should we create a fixture without first name and last name and have a spec like this one that uses it to make sure nothing errors out when they are not present?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "It seems odd to require all Python snippets to have this method when it's not relevant for messages.snip or the discovery snippets. (I see that we're already doing something similar with generateModule/generateBody where some of the implementations are empty. This also seems strange to me.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "What about this: \"// Corresponding PMT does not exist.\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise an error if the config file doesn't exist. I don't think we should raise an error if the config file doesn't exist. I don't think we should raise an error if the config file doesn't exist.",
+      "reference": "You don't need af ormat specified here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Nitpick: import ordering"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "code smell here, a function that create a reward calculator from transaction processor?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a runtime varManager.",
+      "reference": "I don't think the `A` is idomatic is it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the action action action action action action action action action action action action action action action action,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",
+      "reference": "nit: the others use the method name in the api and not the class name of the api"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((())))))(((()))))(((())))((((())))((((())))))((((((((())))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Does it work to run all the sil diagnostic passes before we serialize? That would be more consistent with what the normal compiler does in `FrontendTool.cpp : performCompileStepsPostSILGen()`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You left in a puts."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Hmm, should we also cache the `smoothingScore` for this hit? Or, if we will keep it at returning `0`, couldn't we remove this impl and inherit the default from `Scorable`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I removed that from here because I am hoping that will stop the random unwanted updates to the website with unstable versions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Nit: missing period."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `aws-sdk-s3` file.",
+      "reference": "how **to** deny Simple Storage **Service**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.",
+      "reference": "Were you having trouble with timeouts in general acceptance tests or only the editor test? It's possible to set timeouts on a per-test basis by using `this.timeout(25000)` within the `it()` function. I'd like to drop the global timeout in the future if possible rather than increase it - in some circumstances a failing test can have a knock-on effect which makes all later tests timeout so Travis can get hung up for a long time if no one notices and cancels the build."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `addons.py` file.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this is necessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Instead of blindly ignoring all errors, this should just ignore the volume not found error."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "The `rowPosition` will be ignored if the position column is not projected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is there a possibility of a clash between periodSeconds and timeoutSeconds? For instance, the current probe is not yet timed-out and the next one has started."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This logic is already been performed in `CommandLine.defaultFactory().create(cls)`... whats the point of repeating it here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))endendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendendend",
+      "reference": "Please change from `let` to `const` here and above. Setting value to `this.hot.countSourceCols()` should be enought probably."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not do this. I think we should do this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Somewhat nitpick: I see the `!=` pattern mentioned in the fluent-bit style guide, but imo, it would be safer to check that a fd is non-negative with ` > -1` or `>= 0`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should drop this table.",
+      "reference": "Use the new Ruby 1.9 hash syntax."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Please host to a GitHub repo."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log the error.",
+      "reference": "The Error log message should not expose internals. The message should be something like this `\"done split failed for address %v\", tagr.Address`. Also, the Debugf would be more informative with the address in the message."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a separate line.",
+      "reference": "can we rename `fileLogLevelUsage` to be more generic like `instanceLogLevelUsage`? Same goes for other var below like fileLogLevelFlagName, FileLogLevel."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Does this one not need the `tabContent` object used in the other files?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Our use of the terms `managed` and `unmanaged` in CAPA is interesting. I think we should probably update the docs (as part of a separate PR) to explain that we are referring to whether its CAPA managed infra. As opposed to meaning AWS managed service."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Looks like all of these can be put into a list."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: \"*mapping\" for a map is unnecessary. Consider calling this `originalNames` or similar."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "Please split this into two sentences; i.e. \"This profile will be permanently deleted. This action cannot be undone.\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "NPE here and in other APS plugins"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Thanks for the fixing, and could you please provide more details for this bug? Because we have the deduplication mechanism in cloudhub, so it will has no problem."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "These could be final"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the rest invocation.",
+      "reference": "highway have the same problem we can add a new method in invocation: mergeContext 1.if new context have more items, then addAll to new context, and replace old context 2.if new context have less items, then allAll to old context directly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Created a single error so it's not interleaved in log"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "`isIE9` was reverted. Shouldn't this condition be reverted as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Sorry if I'm being too pedantic here, but wouldn't it be nice to have standard parameter name? Like using `defaultValue` everywhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remind me again: what's the point of having new clients connect to both -0 and -1? If we ever have to blackhole -0, we'd have to blackhole -1 at the same time, right? What is supposed to be the difference between the two? Is it just that someday we might want to have two ELBs, and this will help load balance between them?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not go back to `c.setPingTimer()` here instead so you don't need the new boolean in setFirstPingTimer()."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "We should figure out why so many of these files have an invisible change on the first line: Are we writing out some sort of byte order mark?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this file.",
+      "reference": "Was this our code @csrwng"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think you need `.untaint` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `else if name.nil?` or a `else if name.nil?`?",
+      "reference": "Why are we including the `files/` directory in this check? I know `tasks/` and `plans/` make sense, since you can reference content in those directories from the CLI, but I don't think you can for `files/` (unless I'm missing a command)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "And again. The reason it's bad is that if someone uses a JDK not produced by Oracle they won't have this class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `CertificateSpec` struct.",
+      "reference": "Can we rename this field to `Subject`? Looking around, it seems like'subject' is the standard terminology for this stanza"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")\")\"\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "Remove additional whitespace."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should add `Secure` as well"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the name here.",
+      "reference": "I presume this isn't a big deal"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Maybe {}, even though no multi-line body?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We can try something like this: response.should render_template(:partial => 'partial_name')"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Please use `isinstance(text, bytes)` instead. Otherwise, this will lead to unnecessary decoding on python 2 unicode strings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This one is unrelated to the GetSymbolVendor removal... the API to GetValueAsData was changed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "can you assert the value of this field below similar to other fields?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I'll change that to \"linkplain\" for consistency :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is fix. But since the history resource was relying on the bug to work, I had to do some changes regarding the history entries (eg. explicit declare that the permissions inherit from bucket)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this at the end of the stream. I don't think we should do this at the end of the stream.",
+      "reference": "can't we leverage Closeable here and get some sugar&warns? Also, line 89 still calls setContext().. is it right? or I'm missing something?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "Use explicit swarm.Address when defining peerID, by using NewAddress, and remove conversion here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `root` directory.",
+      "reference": "`RpmDependenciesDirectory` should start with a lowercase character so it's not exported outside of this package, it looks like its only referenced in this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be None.",
+      "reference": "If we make a new backbone class, we don't need to support `BasicBlock`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This was an out-of-date dupe of the check on line 335"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Let's put this back"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Things like these should have been addressed before submitting a pull request."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to track prometheus, but I don't think we should track prometheus, UI requests in prometheus.",
+      "reference": "This one as well. Any better suggestion please?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "wonder if we should collect c.trace, c.pa.subject, etc.. while under the lock to prevent data races.. or simply move the tracing under the lock."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check check.",
+      "reference": "Why is this hack needed? Ideally, we shouldn't need that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Minor/Nitpick: replace `1` with a constant, esp. as used in `prog/weaver/http.go` in `{{if eq.Plugin.Version 1}}`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "nit: Looks like the whitespace got thrown off, can you fix this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Redo this by adding a string literal and then pressing F6 to have Resharper move it to Properties\\Resources.resx which will also create this property."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this wrapper function.",
+      "reference": "Unless a log file has been specified, IMO you should set the server option to enable syslog (windows event log) here, or someplace along the service start code path. We shouldn't really rely on users to specify that when creating the service."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "It's strange here, because I saw the `TableColumn` is marked as `PublicEvolving`, but after released flink 1.12.0 it did not have any Interface compatibility guarantee. At least, it should marked as `deprecated`, and keep it a major release."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure regarding this approach, for me the whole text including anchors should go to resources like ` netConfigLink.setText(CoreMessages.dialog_connection_edit_wizard_conn_conf_network_link); ` You shouldn't concatenate translated values inside the code. If you need some params, please use NLS.bind()"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "How often do we expect this to trigger? Should we maybe put it behind an if logger.Debug()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "How was the name `controller` arrived? Can you get a consensus for the name controller? This may be OK for jiva. However, c-stor does not have a concept called `controller`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid",
+      "reference": "i dont think we need to explicitly single out `kernel.domainname` here since its not a TODO for OCI either right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `on_setup_ostream` function.",
+      "reference": "Should we better change the operator to `<` since the variable defines the minimum size that gets compressed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is a good test.",
+      "reference": "I'm really impressed by the AppendElements addition! Very cool! :-)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This change means that users can't easily see which version of the selenium server they're using. This is `info` level information."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should be in qtutils and imported to here and the other place instead of declaring it twice."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be done in the `FetchCertAlternatives` function.",
+      "reference": "Seems a bit weird to add a timeout in \"logging\" middleware, but I see that that is done elsewhere, so fine."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This code is passing a non localized string when it should be passing in a localized string or it should use the name of the item being deleted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could we combine this with the `setState` call above, so we don't have to call it twice?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "That part that still leaves me mystified is how the String class, when populated with a value from the SQL_ASCII encoded database is set to \"UTF-8\" encoding. Since the database is SQL_ASCII, each byte in the string stored in the database is considered one character. Ruby, however, is using UTF-8, which is writing a series of one-byte code points that are only meaningful when considered in the correct encoding. When Ruby passes a string to Postgresql, the code points are essentially \"flattened\" into bytes as they are written to the DB. When Rails (through Ruby) asks for a string from the DB, where does the information about the encoding come from?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should move this into the `BoltDB` class.",
+      "reference": "Is it a doable way and does it make sense."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning, but I don't think it should be a warning.",
+      "reference": "max was wrong here. As its buitlt-in, not a number, and a TypeError was thrown."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This change is not needed, please revert it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "@ClimbsRocks Please add that it could be a string. `feval : callable, string or None, optional (default=None)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "now that I have started using, I realized, I could have named my new class singular `Sport` and not having to make this change. let me know, I will update"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Not sure why this is changing to a hard-coded string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason why we `str` the result? It would be nice to eventually support more datatypes here, so we want to generally aim for arbitrary JSON."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "Why did we update the to this api?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a static method.",
+      "reference": "should probably just catch `IllegalArgumentException` here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "What does this error message mean?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this change is necessary. If we cast `value` to type `six.text_type`, then the next if statement should evaluate to True and do the encoding for us."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `cart_item_traits` table.",
+      "reference": "Can we move this into a method(s)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "You could perhaps call this `strlen` (although I don't particularly care about the name as it is an implementation detail)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should we have a common `Escape()` method that can be used everywhere?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "The whitespace removal above here is probably unintentional :slightly_smiling_face:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to change the code.",
+      "reference": "should we start p2p even after dispatcher? b/c dispatcher handles msg from p2p"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Did we decide once and for all to use req/resp throughout spring?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This will delete the whole bucket, which could have unforseen consequences in normal use cases. We should be deleting args.SourceFile instead."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "Lets move the whole string to next line for better readability"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))(((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "Please change this back to `Error saving WebCal-calendar` (and `Error saving WebCal-calendar` only)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The vendor prefix is still being used on Chromium based browsers like Edge Chromium and Chrome. Did you mean to remove this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "Not ideal, but I used a test case orderer so I could avoid a bug that occurs when running two tracer's sequentially with different DD_LOGS_INJECTION settings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think the condition should be ` uint(headerLengthSize) + crypto.Extension + (len(p.blobs)+1)*uint(EntrySize) > uint(maxHeaderSize)` `headerLengthSize` is only the length field. But the pack header also includes the blob type and its ID. And the result of the check, currently seems to be inverted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Remove selector if only 1 version is supported"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Why did you remove more than the asked command?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I just realized that we are logging time now - we shouldn't do that here, that's the logger's job. I've opened a new issue for that #444."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "why is the `sanitize=True` here in the docs?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.",
+      "reference": "Didn't end up using this, but I think it's useful anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm pretty sure there's already a metadata item that contains what you're calculating here (PackageRelativePath)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We want to show this button only when there is a page for us to connect to. There is no reason to put the Browse Security Info button on the page at all unless we've identified the UUID from the KB."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why `2` in this and others?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it's better to create a new test that does the same thing.",
+      "reference": "This may cause a new allocation, please consider merging the concat in above line. Same applies to change in dotnethostmanager."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "Alternatively (and better) would be to look for the.level attribute of the node. If it's bigger or equal to 1, than that is a relative import. So \"from. import x\" should have level 1, while \"from.. import z\" should have level 2 and so on. The same should happen for \"from.c import z\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Btw. this API must definitely change with PMD 7 - we are exposing here a implementation detail (that we use Saxon). And it happens, that the way, how custom functions are registered, changed with Saxon 9.5... which makes the need for a implementation agnostic API relevant..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `DeploymentPlanner` spec.",
+      "reference": "nit: `Additional configuration used while sending notification to external services.`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should only be sent if the driver is speaking to a W3C conformant remote, so we need an if-condition check like we have in the Python bindings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the title here. I don't think we need to change the title here.",
+      "reference": "This should have failed before."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `PaymentChannel` module.",
+      "reference": "the paymentchannel dir is where the paymentchannel manager will live. it will store the types below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is Safari specific and should be defined somewhere in the `safaridriver` namespace"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "assignments should only be cuddled with other assignments (from `wsl`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "prefer changing the signature by adding params to the end, not the middle, I think."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `makeStatefulSetService` method. I think we should add this to the `makeStatefulSetService` method in the `makeStatefulSetService` method.",
+      "reference": "I guess we aim for hardcoded port for Prometheus operated ports right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is the same effect as doing `node.parent.fromlineno` but avoids the `StatementMissing` exception from calling `statement`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "I think user-ids might be better; also note that options should use - and not _ to separate words. Also, how are more than one id specified? comma seperated? I think the usage statement should indicate this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "This code is necessary. It makes sure that you can sleep for longer durations than the timer supports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Can we add the new name in parallel and deprecate this name? We should be careful about changes to the public API and give people at least a release to switch over before removing public methods."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `if (backend->impl && backend->impl->destroy) {`",
+      "reference": "If you're going to start testing that impl itself is not NULL you should probably be doing it everywhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in LoadPlainYAMLManifests"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why is this called toBuilder when the method is called fromBuilder? (I realise you did not change this...)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "nit: seems rather large."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a `int(time.time())`",
+      "reference": "I think it'd make sense to only calculate time.time() once (it's also used if max_ts and min_ts aren't set)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Use existing `grpcStubCallString` instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "In a recent PR, Bob added a `TracerConstants` class. Do you think this makes sense to put in that class instead so that we can consolidate?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this. I'm not sure if this is the best way to do it, but I'm not sure if it is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I want to propose couple of different names for catchpointWriting: syncInterruptedWaitingCatchpointWriting syncWaitingForCatchpointWriting catchpointWriting is lacking context, and I found it difficult to understand the logic without this context."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a model.",
+      "reference": "Do you still need the `name` in the arg description, if this is not `str` type anymore.?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "We may raise a warning."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the model.",
+      "reference": "Trailing comma caused the eslint test to fail"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I think you should use `app.config`. In the usual case, the config file is not overwritten, there is additional config file outside of the source of `Invenio`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Will you please update the copyright message to now include `2021`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Potential subscript out of range."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "please undo this change. you didn't really meant to make it, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "To check! are these millseconds or seconds :thinking: The docs aren't clear"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This upload exceeded maximum number of supported parts, error now. This upload exceeded maximum number of supported parts, error now.",
+      "reference": "Why was this moved?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "What are these object with suffix Expansion?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This breaks backwards compatibility, so it will have to wait for the next quarterly release of the default is to deny. I would recommend adding the flag with the default to allow and then at the next quarterly release rc cycle flip the flag to deny."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I'm kind of surprised this doesn't require `typename`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this will break the case (you can try even with /usr/bin/bison as value): `YACC=\"/path/to/bison -y\"./configure` I wonder if we should use AC_PROG_YACC at all or simply use AC_CHECK_PROGS since we want to use bison and not another yacc"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "can we explain to users in the docs what happens if they leave the field blank?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this. I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "We try not to change the function footprints unless absolutely necessary. Why is it necessary to have both secuirty_group_ids and security_groups?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Thanks! We're already replacing File.separatorChar with '/' in the call to FileUtil#toCanonicalPath above, so the correct fix here should be: `relativePath.replace('/', '.')` I'll make the change upstream."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate exception class.",
+      "reference": "It could be nice to be explicit about this change in upgrade notes, what do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the auth provider from the session.",
+      "reference": "spotted a bug."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid",
+      "reference": "We were always using 0000000 prefix"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Here we also need to determine if gJobMgr has called the init function."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Out of curiosity, why is `condition.any?` also necessary here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Always use `std::make_shared` whenever possible, it will save you one memory allocation."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Update to real tag before pull."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this check.",
+      "reference": "Is there any better string that only exposed by prometheus? We have changed the meter tags to contain method and service name. For example `scrape()` contains `method=getHealth` and `service=server.internal.health.ITzipkinHealth` which made this test failed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "Adding ICoreLogger here lets us pull this into Core as a strategy"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `-` or `-` or `-` or `-`?",
+      "reference": "why did you change this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is invalid syntax on 1.8."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This isn't part of the PR, but I can't find in the smarts definition that \"[C][C]\" == \"[C]-,:[C]\" There is a line saying essentially not to specify undefined items (but that's a bracket versus non bracket thing)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Is this required for tuple encoding? This is confusing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "Does it need to be a member variable? It is currently only used in one method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@MrTimscampi doesn't this need an update to apiclient?.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This is a nop: prob best for history to not change the line"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should track it.",
+      "reference": "Can you delete this whole file now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "can you combine this passing test, code, solidity binary into existing ArrDelete? the function is much similar, pushing int value into an array, and delete one item in the array"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I think that could lead to problems when setting it to not sorted again. In that case, it will not be reset. What about using one single method for the adapter (`setDragDropEnabled`)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "I'd say the error should be an error, not instructions to the user. So error would be something like \"site should be running and is not\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new field to the ECS data file.",
+      "reference": "Are you sure `v3EndpointIDToContainerName` and `v3EndpointIDToTask` are saved in the state file, can you verify that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a mutex.",
+      "reference": "This mutex is never used. Should it be, if users can now make calls into the crypto setup?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Check here for sles-, and i'd prefer a regex since I don't know what an 'include' is going to do exactly. :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a currency?",
+      "reference": "Should this be `None` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Not sure if the warning message is enough for this time, if the configuration is wrong, java-chassis may need to stop working instead of sending out the warning message to let the admin know about it. BTW, we may need a default override policy here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I see this getting unwieldy as we add more commands with subcommands. Can we perhaps enhance it to handle subcommands properly? Perhaps something like `\"etcd-snapshot:1\"` which would indicate that the etcd-snapshot command may have 1 subcommand after it, and if the 1 next argument after it doesn't start with `--` then the args should be appended after that subcommand."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "why returning a string instead of a list?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "Was there a reason for changing all these integration names? Are they actually used for anything besides information in logs?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FieldInfos` class.",
+      "reference": "we should not resurrect this method that we just removed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This needs to be just return self.get_screenshot_as_file(filename)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this return false here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should have json tag"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is this needed after all? Looks like the struct was re-defined inside the test file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the action action action action action action action action action action action action action action action action,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",
+      "reference": "I think the name of the method should match the name of the action: `removeReachableFiles`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `manage_consent_types.php` instead of `manage_consent_types.php`.",
+      "reference": "can you make the C in Consent lower case to match the other ones in this list?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "fix the group"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Prefer `Stream.anyMatch` instead of iterating over all slots."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be logging.Base(config.GetDefaultLocal(), remote, net, \"test genesisID\")",
+      "reference": "we have `logging.TestingLog()` that should be used for that purpose."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is also a question of style. src[i] will always be valid because of check if 'for' statement"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think killKubeEdgeProcessRunning is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why change it?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "nb: this change is unnecessary"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `publicLink` instead of `publicLink`",
+      "reference": "Is the publicLink mostly empty? I'm just wondering how much this will bloat memory usage as sometimes rclone has millions of Object~s in memory."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This field should be included as part of the Order.",
+      "reference": "I don't think the Internal API types need the json annotations. They are never serialised, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe this was added incidentally. We don't need this function in the interface."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this a safe/reliable way to split the URL?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should move this to the `uploadProjectFile` method.",
+      "reference": "do we also need to profile the time to getConnection()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We need to decode that.",
+      "reference": "Should we move the decode part directly to the actual first-use of this? Or how does this affect if the value gets decoded and we need to get the bytes back later?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the routes. I don't think we should add this to the routes.",
+      "reference": "How would you feel about continuing to point this at the MyResearchController's holdsAction, but instead changing that action to force a redirect to the new holds-list route? That way, people will get sent to the new URL instead of having two different URLs that do the same thing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to do that.",
+      "reference": "I think if yo use %s then you do not need reason.String() and can just do reason."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Having \"wf\" prefix doesn't make sense anymore. Please remove."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Removed this copy of the `spyAll` function and replaced it with the same function declared in `helpers.js`. Same for `sortAttributes` below"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value. I don't think we should have a default value.",
+      "reference": "Default max cpu should be 8 and memory 64GB"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "@itholic, can you remove `nbytes = unsupported_property('nbytes')` at `_MissingPandasLikeSeries`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "What happened to the assertion on `conf.TaskCPUMemLimit`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Just curious: Is using `Object` faster than a literal `{}`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new field to validate certificate renewal times. I don't think we should add a new field to validate certificate renewal times.",
+      "reference": "How come we don't allow this to be configured with the ACME issuer? Happy to leave this as-is for now if there's a lot more consideration that needs to be made, but it seems like we could/should be able to allow this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `NetworkLoadBalancerListener`.",
+      "reference": "Should we remove the `Aliases` field as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should storeSamples and storeTranscriptions.",
+      "reference": "what's the effect of turning these two off? is there an issue on file for context?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "The format like gcloud-beta-prod is a bit hard to understand. Maybe find a a more clear way to describe it,"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this interface is needed.",
+      "reference": "Are we renaming this too in a follow up PR?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale",
+      "reference": "The indentation on this is off by one space to the left"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I guess nothing is wrong with this approach, but more curious if you didn't just go `|| (format!= VK_FORMAT_UNDEFINED)) {` As if there ever was another external format system added in Vulkan it would need to be manually added here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Is order really irrelevant here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))$$$$$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I think this import will be unused now. If it is unused remove it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Let's change to tx"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `defaultDiskBlockCacheFraction` or `defaultSyncBlockCacheFraction`.",
+      "reference": "Looks like I was wrong about the sync cache size being 15% before. There seems to be some reporting bug related to my use of the sync cache, that makes the limit different from the working set cache limit. For now, I say we keep this at `0.10` (change the param default too), and we can change it later if needed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think it'd be a good idea to define the environment variable name as a constant in values.go because it's hard-coded in several places, but that's a small point."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new index to this table. I think we should add a new index to this table.",
+      "reference": "Style/SymbolArray: Use %i or %I for an array of symbols."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Our habit is to go ahead and put a description line (or more) in front of every function, not just non-test or exported functions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I'm slightly concerned about this because doesn't ORCID use XML instead of JSON?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should use datetime.now(timezone.utc) instead of datetime.now(timezone.utc)",
+      "reference": "brackets around if conditions isn't really pythonic."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "It turn out that when we close server it closed underlying listener itself, so this line always generated and error."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `objectId` and `realm_id` to `objectId` and `realm_id` as well.",
+      "reference": "Looks like this is for debugging? Maybe just remove."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Same here - this code is duplicated. I think we can just remove the `exists?` method completely from `Criteria` and it should delegate to the context."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "I'm not quite sure that we preallocate memory. Do you have a good reason for that?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "If we have added to s.clients, we could just do the following since if its a route will be ok I think. s.mu.Lock() defer s.mu.Unlock() return len(s.clients) <+ s.opts.MaxConn"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "if the targetLeader is src_ itself, it is really need call transLeader function?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this method is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Can we remove this featureConfig since you removed in L98 (assuming it is not used else where)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "namespaces in this file need a sorting"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "This line should actually be: `if c.KubernetesProvider == config.ProviderAKS && c.Wireguard.EncryptHostTraffic {` because we only need to tweak the MTU like this on AKS."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`get` has an optional second parameter that is the default if the key isn't found."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `$user->id` instead of `$user->id`",
+      "reference": "Please also indent the new response line as was done to the existing line above."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))(((((((((-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't need this-> here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))2))",
+      "reference": "I believe this is incorrect, if I'm not wrong, MESSAGE_TRADE should be used when buying/selling items from NPC's"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Better if you give split[0], split[1], and split[2] descriptive names than using them this much through so many lines of code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "I know we're deleting this soon but I thought I'd fix it anyway :smile:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I like this, makes it clearer what scope the continuation is in"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "These test checks if the value of the merged cells is correct. Please revert the changes and set `autoWrapCol` and `autoWrapRow` to `false` to the Handsontable instance. This change applies to the entire mergeCells.e2e.js file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `AccountChangeSetBucket` class.",
+      "reference": "Don't need to clear them - because nobody have data there, also can don't delete buckets - just leave them, new nodes will not have them if remove bucket from buckets.go"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file is needed.",
+      "reference": "Similarly, this has only one implementing class"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "Does it send requests with urlencoded bodies anywhere? I thought it sends only json. Maybe content-type should be `application/json` by default?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I must have forgotten that one in previous PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80",
+      "reference": "This test name doesn't really reflect what the test does any more... Then again I'm not really sure what it is testing now - is it actually just testing that FactoryGirl can create records? or does that itself funnel through the rails code so that we're testing rails can create records?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Can this be `BuilderForYAMLObject`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please fix this issue.",
+      "reference": "better use `with mp.Pool(...) as pool:` here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "Since this is a config problem, BAD_REQUEST is probably not the right response."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "We could probably do 1 sec if we have time, and hence exit early if we have small number of clients. So LB = 60 sec. Grace = 10secs. So 50Sec window, if NumClients < 50, Close 1 every second. Then exit when NumClients == 0."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should merge the Spark columns into one.",
+      "reference": "can you rename `that_col` to `that_column`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This is not correct, it will override everything else that is currently in `Widgets`. This file shouldn't be modified at all, we should be adding `components.Widget` in `assets/js/googlesitekit/widgets/index.js`, where the rest of that object is defined. Oh, and there's a typo here :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Each task finished will result in the meta info updated?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary anymore.",
+      "reference": "Quick follow-up @aaemnnosttv, why this and not `.trim()`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should disable this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think we should have file-wide exceptions for this rule, let's annotate the individual instances."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line.",
+      "reference": "@raprasad you plan to take this \"if true\" out, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could you adjust this to `with open(path, \"rb\"):` here and below? We should make sure that we close all files."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Does this need its own import block or can it be combined with the imports below as in most other files?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in the future.",
+      "reference": "It defaults to `false`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why conditional check is done? As i understand, later both `applyPreflightCorsResponse()` and `allowAllCorsActions()` does the same"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "has not yet exit?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if the version should be part of the deprecation API. It might ease our future selves while debugging issues =)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We chose `info` in the test code for obvious reasons. Changing to `finest` makes debugging harder and noisier."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is just a rename..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should probably panic here. I think hashers are contracted not to return errors (and returning \"\" doesn't handle the error)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this interface is needed.",
+      "reference": "Aside: this is a confusing name for an interface that contains multiple addresses."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "We expect to use Bolt::CommandResult for scripts as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to do this.",
+      "reference": "same thing as above inre commas and args?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we validate that this is between 0 and 100?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`HardKiller` doing `os.Exit()` without proper shutting down other dependencies. I think there should be a better approach for this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why isnt the return value checked?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "remove this debug"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "This should change to a call to `Layer::find_layer_index`, which should be renamed to `find_child_layer_index` and it should return a `size_t` (technically the `difference_type` for whatever iterators are going to be used)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is one of the main application executables. This is one of the main application executables. This is one of the main application executables.",
+      "reference": "what is this change about?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why did we leave the `stderr` param in this case while we removed it from other bake methods?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This seems to only be used by the server/ca package.... maybe this can live there instead of being lumped into these API implementation helpers?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure why we need this.",
+      "reference": "hmm.. this is Hacky, the test will succeed in Windows even if you remove the calls to these, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should this block be in the file `05_install_ruby.rb`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this filter.",
+      "reference": "To match outbounds, let's just call this `Unary: recorder`, `Oneway:...`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`string.encode('utf-8')` is more common but I guess this is mostly cosmetic :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log.",
+      "reference": "Consider logging `r.Url.Path`? Either way, ship it!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "this probably should be done lazely only if logic/app call txn in the group. Or even done in LogicSigSanityCheck?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `WorkflowExecutionStartedEventForContinueAsNew` method.",
+      "reference": "Please move this to `common/enums/defaults.go`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this import is needed.",
+      "reference": "In general, if you find unalphabetized imports, you should alphabetize them. Fine for now though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "we should probably deprecate (and display a warning) the misspelled keyword arg here rather than removing it... and then add the new one. This changes a public API and will break any code that is currently using the misspelled version."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Is this if statement here necessary? It looks like this is the same logic that is taken care of in the setter for the property \"CompensationVoltage\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be used.",
+      "reference": "Eliminate this function; handled by mappings and analyzer"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `routes.php` file. I don't think we should move this to the `routes.php` file. I don't think we should move this to the `routes.php` file. I think we should move this to the `routes.php` file.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if this new logic would actually fit better as a support method, both for readability and overriding... e.g. 
     protected function getRouteNameFromDataSource($route) { if ($route === 'collection') { return $this->getDataSource()->getCollectionRoute(); } elseif ($route ==='record') { return $this->getDataSource()->getRecordRoute(); } return $route; } 
     That's extremely nitpicky, and you can feel free to leave this as-is if you prefer... but that feels marginally better to me."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is this test test environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment environment",
+      "reference": "This is in test code: understanding what we're doing is important in this context."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This change (and a few similar ones below) are not related to rpi3 support, and should be removed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Hmm, why did we come to need the `,` at the end?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm suspicious of this. For one thing, `query._fields[paths[i]]` may be `0`, `false`, etc. so checking for falsy will catch both cases where both the field isn't in the projection and if the field is explicitly excluded from the projection. For another, I'm not so sure that #6546 is a bug. Let's discuss that more."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What is this? I'm a bit unclear why the parser would have a list of statements in it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to `prometheus_operator_enforced_sample_limit`.",
+      "reference": "I believe this is Prometheus name, wonder if this is descriptive enough of a label name? @nrchakradhar @simonpasquier wdyt?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Are most of our other fields default-zero-value? Would `AllowVXLANPacketsFromWorkloads` be a better formulation of this? I think it would make it easier for golang users of the API (default value matches the type zero-value)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2) 2)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "void RemoveTransactions(Address sander, long removeBelowThisNonce) and separate these two calls"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it, but I'm not sure how to go about it. I'm not sure how to go about it, but I'm not sure if it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Not sure which interest you are looking for to propagate here, but keep in mind that we have helpers (maybe not in /test package?) to check/wait for interest on a literal on a server for a given account."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: should not need this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the file size. I think we should keep the file size in bytes.",
+      "reference": "Since this constant is an implementation detail rather than a user-facing API, is it better to define it in a place where it is used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "It would be nice if we have some docs explaining this. Core luigi should avoid having hard to understand code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "extract a method to call from a test"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the coreContainerWorkExecutor.",
+      "reference": "nitpick: regular order is private than final."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a warning here.",
+      "reference": "We could add an old names here, the ideal would be to not force to disable missing-any-param when the old one was already disabled. But they are not really equivalent so maybe you were right to not add it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": ">public const string LINQ = \"LINQ\"; [](start = 8, length = 34) Are there duplicated benchmarks here? #Closed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Probably worth taking the opportunity to add yardocs to this method now. Esp. curious about what the options hash accepts."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a widget?",
+      "reference": "This is Very Meh. We want to get rid of `role_data`, and it's an internal field."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`await this.driver().loadExtension(path);` should work"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is any of this needed anymore?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you add a mention here and in `ostree-repo.c` that the holes were found with `pahole`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "While we're changing this, I wonder if we can do away with `extra_controller_params`.. Maybe a new type of `solr_search_params_logic` that appends the attributes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I believe that you only need to rescue Beaker::DSL::Assertions, as they include Minitest::Assertions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Do we need `&=` or `=` is sufficient?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove the config_sync_directory from the config file.",
+      "reference": "Let's keep both of these here. It should work on most any version of Drupal 8 then true?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.",
+      "reference": "@lmolkova This ok? I'm getting random failures from the build checks that don't happen locally from a few non-deterministic time related comparisons."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.",
+      "reference": "Q: are we supposed to change this for files that already exist?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I count only four times where `selection_specs` had to be specified as a keyword instead of by position! If that is how often it was used that positional argument in our own codebase, I am pretty certain users barely used it (if at all)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "is this test for the case above? seems to cover a numeric rather than empty val?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be printed.",
+      "reference": "I like the general idea, but this will break: - JSON is not binary-safe, so anything binary will break this. - JSON is super slow for multiple-MB things - We want to have drag-and-drop upload - the easiest way to implement this is FormData upload, so we should have a multipart/formdata endpoint. Can we put to /flow/content?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))()))(()))",
+      "reference": "_and_synched seems to be more consistent w/ exited_and_cleaned"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: in case of whole file `ifdef` it may be helpful to have `_netcore31` suffix it in the name of the file as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "should use Number instead of Long"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `approvals_by_status` method. I don't think we should add this to the `approvals_by_status` method.",
+      "reference": "Had no idea that method existed!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if we shouldn't just do `w.show()` here, which causes Qt to correctly calculate the sizes."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the `target_path` to the `set_object` method.",
+      "reference": "may be nice to have helper method to generate s3 paths rather than the minor code dup"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This isn't needed here, we still run `this._afterAuthentication` which loads settings & config - the reason the settings fetch is here is to make sure we have all the settings before saving the blog title rather than fetching everything once auth has completed. Probably moot anyway as the oauth code will be removed shortly"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This line is getting a little long; let's move the conditions to at least two lines (maybe three)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Don't use relative paths. src directory is already on the include search path"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Line is too long. [86/80]"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to load the original twitter digits_path here.",
+      "reference": "We have to navigate up four directories to come down three? I see it, but it's kinda icky. Is something like `load Rails.root + 'app/lib/twitter_digits.rb'` out of fashion nowadays?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((//////////////",
+      "reference": "Empty space at end."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "I think similar to line 176 here we'll want to call `detect_project_conflict` after overriding this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "How about `const { promises: fs } = require('fs')` and then replacing `fs.promises.` with `fs.`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This ignores errors closing the body. Not likely to happen, but no reason to take the risk either."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why was this change needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Needs a description added to CommandArgsUsage.resx"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "The line is a bit too long. That's why the test currently fails. Please break it into two lines."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Prefer `Stream.anyMatch` instead of iterating over all slots."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to have a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `ApprovalManager` that returns a `Approval",
+      "reference": "Can this just be a feature flag to check if it's on? This will give us flexibility on launch date (which could be turned on July 1st) and allow us to easily revert back in case the policy is reverted."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Due to this change, src/examples/adc needs to be modified"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "`s/singlePointer/singlePtr` or please rename the type to `singlePointer`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "1\")\")\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Do we need it? If right now it's toml"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "You are never calling oldUnmount, this could lead to a plugin chain failing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "What does setting partitionInfo to null mean exactly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Not sure you need the initial ``not_updated`` as ``any([])`` evaluates to false."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Since this migration hasn't been merged to master yet, what do you think about just squashing these two into the migration you really want?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This doesn't apply to all developers"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think `serializer.xml` can be moved into condition below too"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Probably put this in a simple README.md file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Super Cool bitwise Minor: Most likely you don't need `System.Collections.Generic`, `System.Linq` & `System.Threading.Tasks`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "If we just return the TCC, maybe we need to update the method name for it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "For consistency, shouldn't this use `SwaggerModeler.GetMethodNameFromOperationId(method.Name)` as above? I'd just reuse `\"Additional parameters for \" + SwaggerModeler.GetMethodNameFromOperationId(method.Name) + \" operation.\"` here, `string.Format` with `CultureInfo` is complete nonsense here anyways."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "As this is just a backport, I guess it is fine to leave these timings, although they are not enough to make tests stable."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Why this way?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this work? I'm not sure how to do that.",
+      "reference": "Changing this because otherwise the second run of testExtractCompilationsEndToEndWithDatabase will try to overwrite a generated file and fail. Maybe there's a better way?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This modification is not correct. Suggections: 1. upgread guava to 30.0-jre will fix this issue"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "All changes to signature code stem from here. The syscalls interfaces expects VerifySignature to return an error. I performed the change here and bubbled it up through the rest of the code - mostly mechanical."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "This strategy seems good. Just wondering do you think this is a good time to move stuff out of core? For example, I guess storage, since it's for use by server and not client, doesn't need to be Java 6?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "We had a wrong predicate before: we compared a list to an expression."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Name copy-pasted from above. \"empty\"?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "May I ask why change this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Does this mean we now always include the dictionaries even if they're empty? If so, we should make sure that this doesn't break the Agent (even older versions). It's possible that it doesn't handle empty dictionaries well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "The description and name is unclear. Typo in 'which'."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Files should have an extra line at the end of them."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Why not just call this in the proc_set_num_simd_saved?",
+      "reference": "> i#1312 AVX-512 support: Add code cache to/from context switching. s|to/from|| (redundant and mildly confusing (called \"enter\" and \"return\" in code))."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This stat may fail, right? I think dag_file_exists does not actually check the file is there."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about this.",
+      "reference": "I think we can make a safe assumption that if only two values are passed in then you have `(optionsToValidate, optionsForValidation)`, if its three then you have `(optionsToValidate, overrideOptions, optionsForValidation)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "If there are more items to add to what's being written out here, please add a TODO."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can you add an `else:` case to handle an invalid length? That will prevent weird errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "* We need to deprecate/internalize first on master. * We should directly make the AST node final now * The setter `setName()` can be package-private."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));)-)-)---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Where did this functionality move to?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `splitTableRegion` or `splitTableRegion`",
+      "reference": "maybe should firstly check whether current tidb support `split table region`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please use the same (plural) name for the new component since it renders multiple notifications."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "Perhaps show attempt x of y in message ie: Failed to download block %d (attempt %d of %d). %v"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why did you took `Exception` out? Is this method only throwing runtime exceptions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "please revert all of these unrelated whitespace changes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "PGP_INLINE is clearer IMHO"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Please group imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the maxWorkerThreads.",
+      "reference": "Would it make sense to expose this as a config option in `TestHiveMetastore`? A small number of worker threads helped us to catch a few connection leaks early on."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Let's fix the extra spaces above."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "should a similar change be done for findElement?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "// Keys are stored in an in-memory map, where the key is the name of the // private key, and the value is the structure where the actual private key and the password are // stored."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I think this needs a json inline tag here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Hi @cjimison good point but doesn't this break the compatibility with Erlang/OTP prior to 17.0? I think this could be done over an conditional macro defined in the rebar.config: `{erl_opts, [ {platform_define, \"^R\", pre17} ]}` and some additions with `-ifdef(pre17).... -else.... -endif.`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "should we change/wrap the error?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Are we sure that passing this log in warning does not risk spamming the logs of a node running on the mainnet or on ropsten etc? Do we often receive invalid messages of this type?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'd like to avoid a method call here atm since this is an extremely hot line in the code."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this a bugfix?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is this a relevant change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "@dansanduleac what do you think of this one? dots were aligned and no longer are"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Why we dont delete app specific notes when app is deleted?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "The _OverviewPlugin_ is forcefully enabled without the option to disable it, using _PluginDescription.alwaysEnabled_. That should also work for this plugin?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `SearchFields` class.",
+      "reference": "Can you facet on this new externalStatus Solr field?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if it would it make sense to push the pivot facet handling down into `FilterField` (or maybe a subclass, `PivotFilterField`?)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to leak any implicit return value here.",
+      "reference": "Ah I see what you were saying about making it harder to validate types. We'll have to catch the return for that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "Try using using `.setDismissOnTouch(true)` instead"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `UpdateSpan` method.",
+      "reference": "Zach, is `UpdateSpan` of concern too? I see that it is called from `ExecuteAsyncInternal`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate class.",
+      "reference": "Nit: its scope can be reduced to package default"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why is this get;set;?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((())))))))))((((()))))))((((((((()))))))))))(((((((())))))))((((((((((())))))/(((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Should we also create sender resources for unicast locators? Should we make a similar change on StatelessReader?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\")(I384040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040404040",
+      "reference": "Can we use `dotnet` instead of `net`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Should this be `ForceFlushAsync`? Given we have the `async` suffix elsewhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the modified jmx from the test.",
+      "reference": "Is this change intentional?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This could be an integer property if we supported explicitly setting non-string-valued properties."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "this is not consistent with the previous annotation - is it because of the usage in `Admin\\Content\\Category\\list.html.twig` twig template? Should not it be at least mentioned in the commit message? :slightly_smiling_face:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "why add `return` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((()));)));)));)));));));));));));));));));));));));))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "put this hash in variable"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not use `kbfsblock.ZeroRefNonce`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "what mypy warning does this address? I'm confused by this change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Note that `hasAttacked` that is called before this function already performs this check. You probably don't need to check `hasAttacked` then."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `app-launcher` file.",
+      "reference": "Unfortunately, the site example only has access to imports from `components/index.js` that means that you can't import the items file `carousel-items.js`. You can import that file in all the other storybook files though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Leave this out and move the script to the scripts folder."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should only be sent if the driver is speaking to a W3C conformant remote, so we need an if-condition check like we have in the Python bindings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `Http` namespace.",
+      "reference": "TransferFormat.Text in general purpose connection interface? :/"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Is this `@missing_text`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "This work for both sides?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `DashboardWidgetPopularKeywordsTable.js`",
+      "reference": "`lodash` shouldn't be grouped under WordPress dependencies"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this test to a separate test, so that we don't have to change the test.",
+      "reference": "Include the standard parameterized error tests as well."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "All lowercase in route rule."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "I'd suggest we use `response.profiles[ 0 ].webPropertyId` here instead, to make sure it's based on the profiles retrieved. The value _should_ be the same, but I think it's a bit more accurate like that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This doesn't change the default of 6h, but will increase the displayed timeframe by 3h for each long press, before wrapping around to 3h. This requires 7 long-presses - quiet a journey..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We still need to figure out a way to get rid of this write method. Is this still necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the test to check that the partition id is the same as the partition id per pattern.",
+      "reference": "`assertItemsEqual` compares the sequences after sorting them, is that intended?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this one needs to be changed since the only previous path is already an absolute one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "what's the goal of this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "why is this here? We already have a message pool in the node."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "Another mess after all renames and enum conversions. Doesn't break anything though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think it's necessary to change this for the history plugin tests?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this? I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "In general, I suggest using the `kind()` getter inhereted from `TransportInterface`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is the removal of `[AppDomainFixedOutput]` on purpose? (looks like a copy-paste...euh..remove error)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this in a separate PR.",
+      "reference": "AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "gofmt everything pls"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `podiochaos` table.",
+      "reference": "ditto, We do not need add this feature for PodXXXChaos"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "There is a simpler way to do this: 1. Don't bother with the whole lowerCamelApiTypeName in SampleConfig 2. Use this code: `return localVarName(Name.upperCamel(apiTypeName, \"Service\"));` Basically, each of the static creation methods of Name just need to have their arguments all be in the same casing, so you would just pass the upper camel string \"Service\" here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "Can you explain this change to me?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.",
+      "reference": "let us rename the artifact to `storageclass-single-replica.yaml`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "Nit: I should have done this before, but rename the file to LibuvFunctions.cs. Make sure no other files are misnamed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This is reserved to be used only in LogCodec // types that combine tag and length (or other info) in a single byte TAG_AND_LEN = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR = (byte) (1 << 5), STR",
+      "reference": "We should not add new types unless absolutely required. I'm not sure `UUID` is requires a new type"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "If only Gatling uses it, can we skip introducing new entity for now? Looks like overkill..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the API response.",
+      "reference": "rename -> info?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Remove the `config_path=dict(...)`, that is automatic!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I had to create a new flattened tree to support this functionality. The only other place in which a flattened tree is created is during the audit itself. Since `axe.cleanup` can be called at any arbitrary time, we can't reuse the same tree."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?",
+      "reference": "As this method is just set the internal cofigModel, it's better to use setConfigs instead of addConfigs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Is this line needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `api/events/v1beta1` file.",
+      "reference": "nit: import formatter"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "can you use LINQ's `All` instead? Should be a side-effects free one liner with that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Could you please remove `#include ` as a whole and see what happens? I believe that this is no longer needed; it was necessary when we called `posix_spawnp` directly, but now we use `h2o_spawnp`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`whether this resource is paused` to `whether this resource has been paused`? To keep same doc style."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a check for the user has permission to manage high priority flows. I don't think we should have a check for the user has permission to manage high priority flows. If the user has permission to manage high priority flows, then we should have a check for the user has permission to manage high priority flows.",
+      "reference": "This method is validating permission for hp flow. Can you please rename this method to convey the same?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this?",
+      "reference": "Just to confirm, do we actually want to explicitly set the `kBeforeHandshake` symbol on all network errors regardless of whether the options/property is passed in?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure why we need this, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "How soon after this will Apply() be called? It would be a shame if there was still a significant delay before a missing or superfluous route was corrected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "While this is commonly correct, the more reliable check is to get the package's identifier from the type checker and check those for equality. The information should be there, just another matter of plumbing it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Just to clarify, should this be 'composite_root/root/' or 'composite_root/'?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Any reason not to move it to after line 281? These are all pubsub related fields IIUC."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Checks if value is a negative `Number` primitive or object. Zero is considered neither positive nor negative."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Just a nit, but remove the empty line here. :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "A `GoPackageInfo` details message should be added to the `CompilationUnit_FileInput` to ensure the import path remains the same."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Please don't create new fields with the `m` prefix. I'd rather mix than introduce more of these."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Can we please simplify these names? they are awfully verbose and repeating the parts that are already unique and obvious."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Flipped the logic here, was this actually wrong before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "I think (a) should be initialized to `NAT_FE_LOOKUP_ALLOW` and (b) it should be probably the first thing in `calico_v4_nat_lookup2`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "I'd look as to what this class actually does... seems weird. Classpath below (under \"run\") is wrong for gradle."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Group w/ algorand imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")#endendendendendend))))))))endendendendend))))))))))endend)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I don't think this import is being used."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is an interesting way to do this. I like it. An alternative way to implement a multiple kind pattern was to have this return `AnyKind` and then have match perform an actual check to see if it matches."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "You did not check this code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This was necessary due to a bug uncovered in testing. If an actor method which requires params is called without any params at all, not returning an error here causes a panic."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Thanks for the pr. Would you be able to edit the file to use spaces rather than tabs? Normally we have prettier run on commit, but I guess file patches don't do that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.",
+      "reference": "Is it intentional that we removed this annotation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ValidationRules` class.",
+      "reference": "should be general?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "if lowest inserted header is non null non zero then pivot should be higher and a better best known on the left. maybe Head?.Number?? Math.Max(Pivot, LowestInsertedHeader))?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))(((((((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "Is a FakeApp class needed? Can test use a Mockito mock instance instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "We should make this an enum."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "@lgolding, note I fixed the forward slashes that appeared in the VS output (which was certainly not by design)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Minor unrelated fix that snuck in."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Took the opportunity to fix the import ordering."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "I think int and float can be handled in one if statement. The subsequent calculations don't really care whether it si a float or an int."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we keep this at 10 to reduce the probability of a flake? Or are you afraid this would be too likely to give a false positive if delayed cancellation is every actually broken?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-x-cloud/go-x-cloud/go-x-x-cloud/go-x-x-cloud/go-x",
+      "reference": "nit: add a blank line under this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this flag is necessary.",
+      "reference": "no need to add this flag query the endpoint set-up to determine the chainID"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should return undefined if the textarea is empty.",
+      "reference": "Here is a few scenario - What if there is a submit button with in a form, but is always disabled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Weh_x TYPE_W, OPSZ_half_16_vex32_evex64",
+      "reference": "wrong code: should be `Wh_e`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "This leads to a small \"leak\" (mostly theoretical only though), if we don't want it this could be created in `initialize()` and destroyed in `finalize()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "BuildIDOSEnvVarName or similar, otherwise it sounds it's actually holding actual value of env var"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log in the logger. I don't think we should log in the logger. I think it would be better to log in the logger.",
+      "reference": "I like this standard \"container has started\" message. Should we have a \"container exited because FOO\" message as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "And again. The reason it's bad is that if someone uses a JDK not produced by Oracle they won't have this class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `require` file.",
+      "reference": "We have Vue application at our disposal, and have examples container implemented as component. Shouldn't helpers be imported instead being global? Not the best practice in Vue app I guess"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "No trailing punctuation in the error message."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should close the clip.",
+      "reference": "tested? seems like it could break"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "This have to be public because the renamed o.a.l.backward_index.TestBackwardsCompatibility refers this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this, but I'm not sure how to fix it.",
+      "reference": "unrelated to your change, but I don't think that this is correct anymore. We also seen to remove application support from `primaryNodeUnupgradedProtocol` for the test to be correct."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `Session` class.",
+      "reference": "Should this also validate that the RoleArn env var is provided, or just let the creds fail?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "fwiw, in tchannel-go I've implemented a similar method on TChannel that either returns a Tracer instance it was initialized with, or returns `opentracing.GlobalTracer()`, which by default happens to return a singleton instance of `NoopTracer`. In Go the use of global variables is not frowned upon as say in Java, so this pattern allows minimal work to enable tracing in a service, one just needs to store a real tracer in the global variable, e.g. via `opentracing.InitGlobalTracer(someTracerImpl)`, while the instances of TChannel do not need to be explicitly given any tracer since they will default to that global."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the error message.",
+      "reference": "Shall we also add `ks.Series([1, 2, 3], name=[\"0\", \"1\"])`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `perm_addNodesToAllowlist`",
+      "reference": "Can this be updated?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "this change is to avoid duplication on the defaults. They are already on the Configuration class. (Also I removed the false default, because the admin format does not have it). This is also produces the rest of the diff, changes from false to null."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "What does it protect from? If it's subsequent CNI calls, won't containerID be different from the first one? or it's different in containerd? we use `getInfraContainer` to get the lock identity in CNIAdd. And this reminds me what if the first CNI call and the subquent ones run into connectInterfaceToOVSAsync, will duplicate ports being created or it has been handled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I think it would be better to use `Exception` instead of `Exception`.",
+      "reference": "In Exceptions' constructors, we always add a optional last parameter `Exception $previous = null`. In the past, this was (still is?) a part of the coding standards."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think more idiomatic (and consistent with elsewhere in our code base, and more natural to read as \"25 seconds\") is `25 * time.Second`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add support for this.",
+      "reference": "Enabling `YAML` by default would be a breaking change in behavior for some applications if the struct's used by that application already include YAML tags, but their application has been (un)marshaling DynamoDB Attributes based on the struct name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think that's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "For the command executor, which in turn, uses the HTTP client to talk to the WebDriver, the client might have high-timeout values set, so the shutdown can take a long time if we wait for it to complete, especially if multiple-long running threads are there. I think it might be a good idea in general to couple the shutdown() with `awaitTermination()` with a timeout, if the ongoing tasks do not complete within that timeout then call `shutdownNow()`. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please fix this issue.",
+      "reference": "Is this change needed? `start()` is still defined and uses `HiveMetastoreTest.class`. The only difference is that this doesn't pass a `Configuration` and the parameterless `start` passes `new Configuration()`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I think it is weird to store sr in protocol struct"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "Will this cause a reload _all_ NATable information? It's too bad we don't have some way to limit the reload to just the tables that have a metadata mismatch."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "'fail unless X is a non-zero number' it will also fail if X is a byte string"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this is a bug, but I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "SyntaxError I think"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( # ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( # (",
+      "reference": "I've filed an internal spec issue to add these missing VUs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line.",
+      "reference": "Can you please revert changes to files in the `thoughtworks` package? This is legacy code and we will eventually phase out RC."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")#############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################",
+      "reference": "In iceberg, we usually don't use `*` to import package, it's more clear to import the specify package one by one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "And again. The reason it's bad is that if someone uses a JDK not produced by Oracle they won't have this class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure if this is a bug or if it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Since we now keep track of all bytes written, and extend the write timeout as needed, it's tempting to no longer add 2 times the max buffer size to the bytes written accounting for the connection drain timeout. As we've discussed before, this add several minutes to the timeout with the default 240 bytes/sec rate limit. I'm thinking instead this line changes to `timeoutControl.BytesWritten(minDataRate, 1);` to add a grace period to the drain if necessary. What do you think @Tratcher?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `formPropsSet` object.",
+      "reference": "Good call. Makes we wonder if we should do this with the ARIA props."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))#endendendendend))))))endendendend))))))endend))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Please do not use wildcard imports."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please fix this issue.",
+      "reference": "Not sure about these added logs, as said in the commit message it's probably not something we want all the time, but it helped me debug a bit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should there be an equivalent check or is it ok to remove this comparison?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this reference.",
+      "reference": "sorry, why this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think best practice is to use `NamedList` as the return type, and `NamedList` as the argument type in methods, but I can't find a reference for it right now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Be careful, the base model is imported here!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))(((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),),",
+      "reference": "Do we want to make this part of the default? Probably not. In fact, the default should probably be eth, web3 and net (which are the standard namespaces on other nodes)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]
    Line is too long. [8/80]",
+      "reference": "What is the plan when we deploy the Crawler VM project and eliminate the Clump model?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "these two are customized config fields, if we don't need them any more, we probably can use default ControllerManagerConfiguration"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think we should be pulling the runtime name from the Compiler. There are two compiler frontends, but both of them compile the same source to generate the \"go\" runtime. I think until there is a request from an alternative implementation (the embedded world **might** have a different runtime), it's fine to hardcode this as \"go\""
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find` and in `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find` and `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find` in `model.find`",
+      "reference": "fields may be an object."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "i'm not confident these are the right defaults... anybody have input?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "DiskGroupList can be better name"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "nit: lets leave gateway options at the end of the func signature."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "It will be better to use `commit()` on a separate thread, apart from the UI thread. The reason is `commit()` is synchronous while `apply()` is asynchronous. So in case it might not perform actions immediately as expected."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Took me almost 4 hours to find this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "There should be only a single blank line between imports and `__all__`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `String` instead of a `Integer`.",
+      "reference": "Doc size increased by 1 since _root_ is also returned by queries."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Now the return value has changed (or at least now includes `clip`) it might be worth updating the docstring..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "shadow: declaration of \"err\" shadows declaration at line 410 (from `govet`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should we be escaping $attr and/or $value here? Seems like htmlspecialchars() might be in order to be on the safe side."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `clone_args` method.",
+      "reference": "why not remove the need for the `quiet_o` method and just add it similar to how the `--branch` is added? also, looks like the indenting is a little off"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "These variables are already created in constants. Please reuse those."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "query_args is a string, not a list. Therefore you cannot call append to it. Also, line 986-989 of key.py already have code that is appending the versionId query parameter."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this change and the one below will break the integration tests which expect a `nil` object if `NewObject` fails."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Looks like this isn't used in this file?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "why hidden name? How about `index_name`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be set to hiveScanMode.",
+      "reference": "Usually, CQDs are not accessed directly in executor operators directly. It should be passed as a flag in the TDB. It is possible that the query is compiled in a different process, then this CQD setting won't be available in the executor layer."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "This tag was broken, the value write to log was the memory address. Please verify that this actually write out meaningful content in log."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why do you have to disable all of these checks?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should raise_window() here.",
+      "reference": "Just a note to myself: After merging this, I should edit the line after this one to use `message.error`, as raising a `CommandError` from here seems wrong!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "In this test, we want xax to be dead, so that aflags are not spilled to a slot."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AgentConfig`.",
+      "reference": "I remember there were some misleading code about this but forgot to correct them. Although we initialize `config` here, it was discarded in `complete`, so I guess setting the default value here doesn't take effect. We should change L139-L140 as well to use the initialized `config`. So do antrea-controller."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Stubbin a value object (like `RSpec.configuration`) is a bit of a code smell, I think. You can just set `color_enabled` and `success_color` through the configuration APIs provided by `RSpec::Configuration` -- no need to stub. The `sandboxed` thing in `spec_helper.rb` takes care of preventing changes to the configuration object in one example from leaking into other examples."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "you can use `toString(true)` that will work for BTC and remove the prefix for BCH."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This line is too long now - please break it after the comma."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I find this addition to the interface a bit contentious. I think it would be cleaner to just return the response headers together with the new stream on `NewStream`. I.e. change the method signature for `NewStream` to be: `NewStream(ctx context.Context, overlay swarm.Address, headers p2p.Headers, protocolName, protocolVersion, streamName string) (p2p.Stream, p2p.Headers, error)`. I'd like to hear what other think. cc @zelig @janos"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `if ($cart!== null) {` if ($cart->isEmpty()) { $this->cartWatcherFacade->checkCartModifications($cart); } } else { $this->cartWatcherFacade->checkCartModifications($cart); }",
+      "reference": "i hope there is some magic where isEmpty or some cron can strip all non listable products from cart, but since we have the situation tested it should be OK and also we'll see during tests"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I think we should check the type returned by `getLiteral` and handle that here. Then we won't need separate code for different versions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Tests for JWT handler functionality?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is necessary.",
+      "reference": "It's weird to set a 101 response and complete without writing anything, but this is still a valid test case right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Should we move that information in the capability itself?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add an indexable_1d to this interface.",
+      "reference": "Is this needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "This log should not be an error as it communicates that we need to retry till we get the cert information for remote ingress controller."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "BlockTree alredy has a polluted API, this one seems very internal"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Sorry, I realize my line numbers were probably off after you deleted your variables! I meant for this to go in the `before(:all) do` and `after(:all) do` blocks."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "This bit I wasn't really sure about."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "From the code, a check's metatdata was only added to `axe._load` if a rule used it. Since `role-none` and `role-presentation` were no longer used in any rule, their metadata was never added. This caused any translation file that passed translations for those checks to fail `axe.configure` with > \"Locale provided for unknown check: \"role-none\"\" To fix I added this line to parse all checks regardless of if a rule uses it or not."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should raise `ValueError` if `update_policy not in ['existing', 'incoming']`. (or `in Enum.__members__` or however we want to express legal values)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "`_applicationDelegate` and `_window` are already set in the call for `: this (applicationDelegate, window)`, no need to assigning them again here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We might not have a selector prop in the consumer"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "IMO == true is more readable than?? false"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "feel free when editing sections like this to introduce modern features like object destructuring."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should add a copyright line to the copyright line.",
+      "reference": "I think the correct pragma is `# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This fixes some import errors, due to the fact that this file has the same name than its module."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think we need to clear this out on logout, and update it on login, right?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think normally we'd make this a precondition (using e.g. `g_return_val_if_fail`), but meh, this works too!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `TARGET_MICROSERVICE`",
+      "reference": "Is this header used by other outside service?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "that's fine by me to have simple test for provisioning check"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "These two methods seem to be identical except the names. Any idea why two methods are needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to import this in the future. I think it would be better to use `import sys.path.append(os.path.dirname(os.path.realpath(__file__)), \"..\")`)",
+      "reference": "I don't see much difference between this and `create_db` module. How about having a function with a `database` argument?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "See above, no need to pass the module name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "LightGBM supports multiple validation sets, so please leave `sets`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "you don't need to create a enum for this, java allows you to switch on a string ;) (since java 7?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test should be passed through as `literal` text",
+      "reference": "What is this obscure syntax anyway? o.O"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it. I'm not sure if this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I think we should have one for the CLA Classifier, and KNNClassifier as well. And how about RecordSensor?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into a new class.",
+      "reference": "Missing new line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "`model.schema.base.options.strictPopulate!= null`. Why hardcoding false? Also, `model.base.options` should work and be shorter. Finally, any way to move this up to the `populate()` function in `model.js` that calls `getModelsMapForPopulate()` and shallow clone the object before modifying? A bit random to modify this option here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "We now have Prepare.A/Build.A/Builders.Build.A - what are the differences?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Could you reduce this to one line and change the first argument to a single quoted backslash string? Perhaps we can add this as an option named `:preserve_backslash` to the manify method. That way, we don't need an extra method in the first two cases. Obviously, we still need it for the inline case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "`has(default)` i think is the preferred way of doing this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Does this mean we can only do rewrites if there are no `DeleteFile`'s?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to mock this.",
+      "reference": "Actually, these are fine; we're using 110 as the max line length. (it's also set in the.pylintrc)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "No issue here, but what tool are you running to put these imports into the preferred organization? I have configuration to run `goimports` whenever I save a file, but it appears that that is not quite sufficient."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `InputStream` instead of a `InputStream`",
+      "reference": "guessing this method could/should close it but I didn't see where it was getting called."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not change the flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow flow,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,",
+      "reference": "Could you please use `camelCase` in the property name to follow the naming convention used in the rest of the properties?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Can we revert this change? looks like an extra space was added at the end"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This just grabs any one of the proto services defined in the API, right? What happens when there are multiple (like with PubSub)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Remove the pylint disable and remove the.format() from the string. The tablename is just 'violations'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `steps_remaining_for` method. I don't think we should add this to the `steps_remaining_for` method. I don't think we should add this to the `steps_remaining_for` method. I don't think we should add this to the `steps_remaining_for` method.",
+      "reference": "Will this implementation allow you to add new exercises to the trail?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message. I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Actually there is race condition here, because pointer assignment isn't atomic on some platform. But this is a rare case we should hit, we can just let it go for now. Maybe this is one of the TODO list."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "We should check somewhere here and in the partitioned_io_buffer that the max_mini_batch_size is properly computed for each model and that it is not aggregate (sum) for all models. The global/max_mini_batch_size should be as specified by the user in the prototext/cmd line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to handle unexpected alerts.",
+      "reference": "you can change the string value, but not the code constant"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "File is not `goimports`-ed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should not add ExecMetrics when guicy.",
+      "reference": "Is this Todo necessary?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "I would recommend to leave out `None` because None is already the default."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a default value.",
+      "reference": "I may have missed previous discussion on this; apologies if that's the case. What do you think about just `input-yaml`, without the `cli-`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure why we need this.",
+      "reference": "Nit: rename to sendError."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "import warnings.filterwarnings(\"ignore\", level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level level\")\")\")\")\")\")\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));",
+      "reference": "`pylint` wants to know why this `import` isn't at the top of the file; and it's kinda right"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `FeedUrlNotFoundException` class.",
+      "reference": "To me, using a `RuntimeException` for this feels a bit weird. I would just extend `Exception`, or maybe even `IoException`. Could you also please overwrite the `getMessage` function to return something like `\"Result does not specify a feed url\"`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "what was the issue here? why did you have to directly set?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm confusied - Isn't `countryString` left empty if `len(country)`!= 0?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((())))))))))))((()))))))))(((()))",
+      "reference": "Would you please update this by using `#if (QT_VERSION >= QT_VERSION_CHECK(5,15,0))` and `QSignalMapper::mappedInt` for Qt >= 5.15?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should stop GPGAgent here.",
+      "reference": "This type of change opens a question on how we can cleanly shutdown or prevent all running agents so we do not run the risk of an agent holding kernel mountpoints, which can cause unsafe unmount/chroot exit. Will open a github issue to track this. This specific change itself is fine. It is a pointed change specifically for stopping the offending agent."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this? I don't think we can do this.",
+      "reference": "this file is model generated by protobuf, just for compatible test it's better not change it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should track cancelled events.",
+      "reference": "It turns out we can send the reason as the property to Segment on the event. Then we can do whatever we want with it. In this case, I think we'll fire a web hook to Zapier which will add a note or message on the user in Intercom."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This class is very similar to `Catalog`. Is there a way to have this class compose a `Catalog` instance or extract a common class which they can both compose?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Why did you decide to drop the `queue` from parameters of `wrap` function? The agreement was that all functions for DPC++ case that accept non-host-accessible memory shall accept the queue directly."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the test.",
+      "reference": "I think this is a bad name, as its not clear what it does by name alone. If we merge this it should be something like `use_links_to_files_in_output` and should take either a custom scheme like `rspec` or default to `file`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Arguably this is actually still valuable for perf, maybe it should just be a warning?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "didn't way say that the topology driver will actually insert the entries to the address book?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "This seems safe to me. My guess is the original checks were a combination of before + after `oldParentVNode` became reliably a `(vnode | null)`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "also in the `.md` please."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `install_package` or `install_package`?",
+      "reference": "RHEL is an acronym and is usually all caps. Why are you adding a redhat regex matcher?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Maybe I am daft but it looks like you removed fixed width readers but I don't see where you added any readers?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have this in the `ManifestMantarayManifest.js` file.",
+      "reference": "@acud The reason I moved these here is because I need them in the traversal tests. The traversal package doesn't need this. I don't see any particular reason why any package apart from api would need this. api package imports traversal, so I cannot import api in traversal pkg. Also if these change in future, the traversal tests need to change. So maybe enough reason to move these here? That way both packages can access these as they both depend on manifest"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be set to False.",
+      "reference": "I'd prefer this to be called `pinned` - also it should probably be in the `TabData` class instead, which is accessible as the `.data` attribute of the `BrowserTab` object - otherwise, `BrowserTab` would have a lot of quite \"random\" attributes :wink:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Nit: `Headless` is one word, not two, and so doesn't need camelcasing in this way."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not import audit as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `CategoryDataFixture` class. I don't think we should move this to the `CategoryDataFixture` class. I think it would be better to move this into the `CategoryDataFixture` class.",
+      "reference": "OK, i think there will be more of those..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ": : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :_________________________________________________________0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0",
+      "reference": "Can you add : 'password' => 'The provided password is incorrect.',?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Extraneous blank line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "nitpick: use `const virtualTree`, I know it was `let` earlier."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We don't need to cache the new version.",
+      "reference": "Actually, I think it might be easier to do it here. Rough outline: 1. Save a list of the md cache keys and new brmd while looping. 2. After the loop, for each entry: 2a. Look up the old cache entry. If it doesn't exist, continue. 2b. Otherwise, make a deep copy of it, and replace its brmd with the newly-generated one. 2c. Delete the old cache entry, put the new cache entry. What do you think? The problem with the current approach is that the gap between dropping the old version and putting the new version is large enough that when we put the new version, we may be kicking out hotter cache entries. In this case, we'd be doing so to a lesser extent. Ideally, we'd be able to replace the entry in the MDCache LRU without changing the LRU info."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "We need tests for this"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "NewExporter takes in two arguments: a configuration for the metrics connection and one for the traces"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Why not use currentPlayer instead of playbackManager.getCurrentPlayer()?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Space inside { missing.
    Space inside } missing.",
+      "reference": "Avoid comma after the last parameter of a method call, unless each item is on its own line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should keep the metadata of containers managed by the agent. I think we should keep the metadata of containers managed by the agent and keep the metadata of containers managed managed by the agent.",
+      "reference": "You should remove the outdated sentence."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Please restore the empty line after the group of `STATE_*` constants. This visual separation makes the code easier to read."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Unsure why this is `RestoreFiles` now vs `GoldenRetriever`, thought we deprecated the first?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Not sure what this is. Bad merge?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'm confused, what did this actually fix? Is there a reason we are setting `err` in the parent scope to `nil` in this round-about way?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed, but I don't think it's a good idea to add a test for platform in the next PR. I'm not sure if it's a good idea to add a test for platform in the next PR. I'm not sure if it's a good idea to add a test for platform in the next PR, but if it's a good idea to add a test for platform in the next PR, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to add a test for platform in the next PR. If it's a good idea to add a test for platform in the next PR, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can we remove this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should redirect to welcome_to_upcase_path.",
+      "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "line is 195 characters (from `lll`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the error message.",
+      "reference": "could not import k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/util/slice (invalid package name: \"\") (from `typecheck`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@disordinary would you be able to configure your editor to use the `.editorconfig` file so that we can avoid final newline changes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I really think we should not use this style where unused arguments are named with underscore. While this eases the person writing the function it does it at an expense of readability and debugging. So next person who needs to actually use this argument will need to check the spec and rename this to `obj` and then use it or if he is debugging it he will is not able to watch for a meaningful variable name and will need to inspect `_` which is weird and uncomfortable. We have not used this style anywhere in the code while I agree its very tempting to use it :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Thanks for avoiding the default value for the param. But, I think sending heap as NULL might make this program to fail. Have you tested this program? If you have tested this program already, then this PR is ready to be merged."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `MvvmCross.Platforms.Uap.Presenters.Attributes` class.",
+      "reference": "Don't make it sealed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Did we miss that for jwt before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "It appears that using SERCOM1 was a bug: the only SERCOM that is supported on the TX/RX pins is SERCOM0. Previous UART support wouldn't have worked on the Trinket M0 TX/RX pins anyway (`PA06`/`PA07`). This PR fixes that, and should thereby add support for UART on the Trinket M0."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale.locale",
+      "reference": "Spaces for indentation, not tabs"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "doing this as a binding map was insane, but with the ConstBindingIterator to hide the binding->index gunk and avoid the hashes during access it sticks out."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test.",
+      "reference": "nitpick: I'd rather move this into the test method directly (we should avoid variables at the root scope if they are not reused in multiple places). (not critical, though - shouldn't hold back the merge..)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))) #))) #)) #))) # #) #) # #) # #) # #) # #) # #) # #) # #) # #) # #) # # #) # # #) # #) # # # #) # # #) # # # # #) # # # #) # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # #) # # # #) # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # # # # #) # # # #",
+      "reference": "You should do: AssertEx.AreEqual(importPeptideSearchDlg.CurrentPage, ImportPeptideSearchDlg.Pages.match_modifications_page);"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `existsSchema!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null && existSchema.getSummary()!= null",
+      "reference": "SC support batch register schemas we should swtich to new api be careful that maybe will send too big request, need to split to multi request by max size of limit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "At this point, maybe it would make more sense to write this as a range rather than listing specific versions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I guess we can start by putting the `const StatusContextCancelled = 499` at the bottom of this file"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Blocking: populate a non-empty value and check it below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "What is this number value for? How is it used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to include_sexp here.",
+      "reference": "This needs an end keyword"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a property, not a property.",
+      "reference": "I think this is the first record type in Datadog.Trace!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Nit: missing newline above."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"\" \" \" \" \" \" \" \" \"",
+      "reference": "Since it's a one-off, worth putting an info log before and after."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should not be necessary here $scope.calendarsPromise = CalendarService.getPublicCalendar(constants.publicSharingToken);",
+      "reference": "I'm sorry, but the indentation is still wrong. This should be indented by one tab."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "can we add an example?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We usually avoid blank lines at the start of functions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file is part of the Sonata Project package.",
+      "reference": "I dont think this line is needed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error.",
+      "reference": "We should not panic here!!! We return error i.e. 500 http code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it would be better to add a warning to the warning.",
+      "reference": "To avoid useless calls to `conf.l2types.get()` we could have a `set()` of types that are OK in this PCAP files. We could check if `p.__class__ not in self.l2_types_seen` first, only run this code block in that case, and add `self.l2_types_seen.add(p.__class__)`. I'm not sure if I'm clear here... let me know what you think."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source source",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't \"source\" be a noun? How about? -EXECUTION_SOURCE_USER -EXECUTION_SOURCE_SCHEDULE -EXECUTION_SOURCE_EVENT (because it's an event based trigger mechanism)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should not switch to `lvis_v1_instance` here because that base config uses ClassBalancedDataset to oversample the data."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Last time I checked, this technique did not work on all major screen reader - browser combinations. What screen readers have you tested?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "IsFeatureFlagEnabled should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "Most tracer settings can be set in several ways: environment variables, `app.config`/`web.config` file, or in a json file (`~/datadog.json` by default). Most exceptions to this rule are settings in native code (where we use env vars only). Currently, `DD_TRACE_ASPNET_ROUTE_TEMPLATE_RESOURCE_NAMES_ENABLED` will only work as an env var. Was this limitation intentional?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "Would \"DisableIID\" be a better name? For example, we used DisableMetrics, ImageCleanupDisabled,... etc. for other similar fields."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this, I'm not sure how to fix it.",
+      "reference": "So this is a swing of 2: but I think we only need to reduce by 1? The artificial jump added on truncation is not passed to clients: it's like other mangling added later. So if `-max_bb_instrs 4` means 4 app instrs passed to clients, we'd want ==, not ==-1, right? Plus, if we did want -1 and to stop at 3 instead of 4, this is not sufficient: the inner loop above currently has `total_instrs <= cur_max_bb_instrs`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "Does Tinyint belong to this set of types? I suppose the answer is No, but thought it safer to check."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I'm a bit leery of this implementation, because it assumes that the only \"outside\" is to the right side. Note that Blockly assumes that there's nothing useful to the \"outside\" of the toolbox, based on the configuration of the workspace, so it's not like we're doing the right thing either. I think this will break in RTL. If you keep the editor in the same place but inject with RTL, everything you're looking for will be in the delete area. If the editor and stage swap places, this will just be looking on the wrong side."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Just spotted the `local` on here; that shouldn't be needed - no reason to limit this config to env vars only"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "That's a tricky one, as the variable is indeed used in line 2346, which is a `logInfo` message that is not compiled unless `INTERNAL_DEBUG` is set or `CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE` is set to `Debug`. Our CI builds with `INTERNAL_DEBUG` to verify that all `logInfo` are correct, and thus we don't get the warning. The best is probably to remove the iterator (as you did), as well as the part of the log that uses it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "I suspect L2Socket needs a similar change (line 502) for the case where `iface` is None (line 479)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `LicensePermission` model. I don't think we should add this to the `LicensePermission` model, but I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model. I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model, but I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model. I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model, but I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model. I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model. I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model, but I don't think we should add it to the `LicensePermission` model.",
+      "reference": "Was this all that was needed to add CRUD operations for the LicensePermission model? :-)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `if not addon.isPendingRemove and bundle.name.lower() == addon.manifest['name'].lower()`",
+      "reference": "Did you look for other locations that compare name? I expected there to be more."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we can do this in a way that we can do in a way that we can do in a way that we can do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we can do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we can do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we can do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we don't have to do in a way that we don't have to do.",
+      "reference": "There were some requests internally to allow users to opt out of this behaviour. We could expose a property that allows people to toggle ti"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Nice -- this forced `merge-on-getReader/commit` to be used more often in this test?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `ConsensusParams` struct.",
+      "reference": "Instead of a `bool`, can we just call this `MaxAssetDecimals` and have it be a `uint8`/`uint16`/`uint32` whose value is 0 before the upgrade and 19 after (2**64 - 1 is 20 decimal digits)? We'll need to set a maximum value anyway, and that way there's only one new proto variable instead of two."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to check if join has been added once before.",
+      "reference": "where `$aliases` is defined? @javiereguiluz"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "what is the justification for the removal of the registered label? it doesn't seem to have high cardinality nor is it redundant. Seems useful to shed insight into understand situations where workloads aren't registered...."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "`ctx` is unused in ListEvents"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this test should be a separate test.",
+      "reference": "We've had that test on iOS for years."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!",
+      "reference": "This is for creating binlog file for building bdn generated template project. I feel that it's may be helpful in general for bdn diagnostic purpose."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be in the `open_url` function.",
+      "reference": "Can you adjust `open_path` to simply call `path_to_url` and then `open_url` instead of duplicating the code?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))))))))))))(((( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (",
+      "reference": "I'm curious -- do we have information on the upper bound of the delay we would expect with high probability from a peer with no network issues? My intuition is that we want to set this as low as we can reasonably get away with before we start killing productive connections. My uninformed intuition is also that 10 seconds is probably higher than we need and I'd love to know if this is wrong and 10 seconds is already pushing the limit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "what happens if it's == 0"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in the `Bolt::Util.windows?` method.",
+      "reference": "We could potentially log a message here instead that indicates the transport does not support `run-as` on Windows and will be ignored, just in case users expect it to and are surprised. Since it would _always_ be logged when using `--run-as` on Windows, even when the transport isn't being used, it would probably want to be either at debug or trace level."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the project. I don't think we should add this to the project.",
+      "reference": "Did we need this alias? Or is it just a holdout from development?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]
    Line is too long. [81/80]",
+      "reference": "This should have failed before."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "Slower construction, faster matching. I wonder if this will be noticeable in the relenv?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" ( \" \" ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));));",
+      "reference": "I think that if `data_discovery_count_ > static_cast(throughput_publisher_.subscribers_)`, then we should not proceed, since we have discovered some unexpected subscriber that can affect the test results. I'd change the comparison to `==` and have and `else if` contemplating the `>` case"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Remove that include"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "IMO this should be defined in the form theme instead. This class should always be there. If the user configured additional css classes, it should be appended instead of replacing the `{view}-form` css class."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "These tests actually go to the server."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This test modification isn't correct. This task could run immediately and you wouldn't be able to tell if OnCompleted was called or not."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I'd be open to loosening this check if it can help offset the size."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Please add a new line.",
+      "reference": "I'm wondering which we should use, stable or latest?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `EXCLUDE_COMMIT_SEALS_AND_ROUND_NUMBER` instead of `EXCLUDE_COMMIT_SEALS_AND_ROUND_NUMBER`.",
+      "reference": "possibly extending EncodingType enum?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I tested it only in Firefox (`./go //rb:firefox-test`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Why not just use a new class?",
+      "reference": "can we do this in the baseexporter itself? So that exporters just access this.Provider.Resource, and baseexporters take care of populating Provider?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "what is the difference between `/core/events/javascripts/countly.views.js` and `/core/events/javascripts/countly.events.views.js`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "We should make sure this is also supported by `axe.run`. Perhaps moving it into run-rules would cover both API methods more easily?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "If the `MemoryBasedStorage` relies on a `self._bump_and_store_timestamp()`, then every child class will have to implement it. So it should not be prefixed with `_`. And should raise `NotImplementedError` etc. :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "why removed the MemoryDiagnoser attribute?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why do this instead of `localFieldPath.applyGetters(doc[localField], doc)`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Just for a check. Do you really want to delete this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the README.md.",
+      "reference": "github.com/golang/protobuf/proto group in next group"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate command for this.",
+      "reference": "Nit: what about just `pay`? Is there some other subcommand that would conflict with?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Just for the sake of keeping things logically co-located, I'd like to see this functionality in `Quantity.java` which has a lot of utility methods related to this. Maybe a `static` method like `Quantity.isValid(String string)`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "How about use `protected`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should it not be `common.HashLength*2 + common.IncarnationLength`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "We should not do this.",
+      "reference": "those change are done by save plugin."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `null` instead of `null`.",
+      "reference": "There were problems with NullPointerException and with german Umlauts in message titles (I know they're not allowed in the specifiation but they caused my K-9-Inbox to not work at all) I don't know if this is related to PGP/Mime"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I don't think it is a good idea, but I don't think it is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This is an appsec concept right? Should it live in the Appsec namespace?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I'd personally recommend having the demo check for error, unless it's worthless."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "Since this is in a test, I imagine that the choice of `info` level was deliberate."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "good call swapping these names! makes more sense this way i think"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Maybe leaving this out will save some bytes as in let `let isHydrating = replaceNode === null`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Let's manually create one extra whitespace line here (code_ += \"\")"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `BucketPool` class.",
+      "reference": "nit: copy or clone"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this can be called `HasField`, because that's what it's doing. It really is independent of revision."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Is this to avoid collisions?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "nit: a better name for this variable would be enableLogStats, but it's beyond the scope of your change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Because linters don't handle reports now, this was breaking the setup for _all_ tests. I deleted it so I could run my tests, but I didn't check the impact on other tests as many tests are failing at the moment."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do anything if logrus is already initialized in init.go.",
+      "reference": "I'm not really a fan of this -- why not set up logging for `init` here (or setting a global flag) rather than doing it this way?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "This is my favorite part of this PR. Being able to `import` 3rd party tools will hugely improve our workflows. :heart:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this rule to a separate class. I think we should move this rule into a separate class. I think we should move this rule into a separate class.",
+      "reference": "having this extend `UnsynchronizedStaticFormatterRule` seems semantically incorrect even if it works we should probably refactor `UnsynchronizedStaticFormatterRule` into a `UnsynchronizedStaticAccessRule` which can be configured through properties to track unsynchronized static access to any given types (with proper defaults to include `Formatter` and `MessageDigest`). This will also scale better as new types are suggested to have a thread-safe access enforced. The `UnsynchronizedStaticFormatterRule` can be marked as deprecated at the ruleset level, point to the new implementation, overriding the property defaults to keep just looking for `Formatter`. Moreover, the `THREAD_SAFE_FORMATTER` static should probably be replaced with a property of thread-safe classes to ignore, once again with proper defaults."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Keccak.Zero should not be used to mean null"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "perhaps add a couple more edge cases."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice, but I don't think it's a good choice.",
+      "reference": "Is this blank line needed, or typo?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to checkDataVersion(p.config, path{}, ptr));",
+      "reference": "This was a major PitA to find: it was causing some huge goroutine leaks and unfinished prefetches."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "you can use Enum#flat_map here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be removed.",
+      "reference": "Same potential FP: The stream is provided from outside (here as a method parameter), so we should not be responsible here to close it, should we?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the config file.",
+      "reference": "Put a comma after the last parameter of a multiline method call."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "It seems like this is the only way to access javascript `static` methods from Java."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "Why was this removed here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "i am aware that you did not add these, but might i ask why we need these one-liner funcs instead of just exporting the struct fields in the first place?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "I agree with this because it is the opposite of `GetProjectedIds` used above."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "add'sriovNetSupport' also to this list"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Code style issue: `if` body is not wrapped in braces."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Call requires API level 11 (we are on 10)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "do we need to pass the DB if it is the same"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Might be a good idea to rename the variable so it doesn't shadow the type."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Again I'd prefer if this is done in JavaScript rather than in SQL."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "there is still `2` spaces after `a` here.. :P"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it is worth it.",
+      "reference": "What we did in docker before, when working directly with libcontainer, is check if the source is `/dev` and the destination has a `/dev/` prefix. This implementation is probably ok. If someone is mounting their own `/dev` I would expect it to be pre-configured and not need the extra check for if it's the host's `/dev`. (that said, I've not tested yet, just reading through the code)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put this flag.",
+      "reference": "you should add some help on the struct too so that `plz halp featureflags` has a bit of explanation. Might be worth mentioning that these generally won't remain around very long relative to other config options (i.e. they're typically enabling \"preview\" features for the next major)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Maybe `consumerID, receiverID, issuerID`, at least it's a convension in overal repo"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add the URL to the URL.",
+      "reference": "Where does the auth go?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "0 < minimum gas price, `ErrUnderpriced` is more proper"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to TOKEN_EXP_DEFAULT.",
+      "reference": "these should be alphabetized"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move the typeWidth to the next line.",
+      "reference": "These changes look concerning. It looks like the old offset (only index) must not have been correct. If so, there are places where `getDataBuffer().setLong(...)` and similar methods are called but aren't updated like these. Are those cases bugs as well?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "the CAS call here is now wrong since dirty will never be 3 anymore. it might be useful to sweep through the entire usage of this field to see that everything is correct"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Base model is imported here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "import but not used"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "What about the call in `case PACKED` just below? Does that also need to use the `typeWidth`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "not sure i like this change. The encryption package does not need to know about references"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "This shouldn't be added. It's not supported. It's not event the default. If we are going to support this, we need to have CI for it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "omg only four left!!!!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `error` message, not a `error` message.",
+      "reference": "I'm not really sure how this would happen. once the binary is already compiled, the config.Consensus should already have the entry for protocol.ConsensusCurrentVersion."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason for the order swap here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Where will this exception get caught?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the `mainEtherAccPass`.",
+      "reference": "Why this field is made public?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Is the `vmultiplier` only used here for checking if a grid value is nodata?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Is this deliberate? If so, why?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "both URL works. I corrected it anyway."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Rather than have another member and and if/else statement, if the user passes in `PreInvocationAuthorizationAdvice` it could be adapted to match `PreInvocationAuthorizationReactiveAdvice`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good thing to do.",
+      "reference": "The callback get the log level as a number."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the setup.py file.",
+      "reference": "Is there any issue with 2.2.3? If not this should be `<2.3`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.",
+      "reference": "Shall we keep this test?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `formEngine` class.",
+      "reference": "When would this be the case? / When would SelectElement not be available? Is this change compatible with 6.2? (I'd like to roll a release that works with 6.2+ first, before moving on to 7.x)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to avoid this?",
+      "reference": "how about rename to shouldNarrowDataTypeTo?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why not check that the one available renderer is 'bokeh'?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is a error when a broker ingress is sending too many requests to Pub",
+      "reference": "Can you import `bundler.ErrOverflow` rather than redefine it here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "This is just a renaming of the function getResourceType() to getResourceReference()"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Seems like this might need to allow for `\"`s to be used here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "here you assigning it to a local variable, in the original code it assigned to combat(CombatSpell member). Not sure if CombatSpell needs to use a shared_ptr since currently it does not and it works \"good\"."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Should we also remove this? This applies to subscriptions in general, but it seems sort of weird in the context of products now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "I think we should keep these, o.w. our examples will be wrong (where we're importing from `dagster.utils`). Also, we might break folks who've imported following our docs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `TracerProviderBuilder` class.",
+      "reference": "This is good and something that I think opens a lot of possibilities. I think what would be even better is to change up `TracerProviderSdk` to take factories for the processors just like it already does for the instrumentations. Should probably use use a factory for the sampler. If we made those 2 changes then we could actually split this all up into the config and the build phase and we could use the factory methods in the hosting version to call into the IServiceProvider to get those instances."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there a way to make it so `values.New(nil)` works instead of adding a new function?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "DoctrineMediaBundle\\Form\\Type\\ApiDoctrineMediaType''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''",
+      "reference": "> when requirement of Symfony **will be** >= 2.8 Same for others."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `roles` table.",
+      "reference": "I'd like to see if this can just be set on the service account instead of the project. Using the SVC_ACCT_ROLES (which should otherwise be deleted as I don't think anything else is using it.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\"))\"))\"))\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Please remove the unused imports :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `commentable_id`",
+      "reference": "Were these local edits? There doesn't appear to be a change here. If so, let's remove this from the commit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nit: this should be further down w/ the rest of the github imports"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this.",
+      "reference": "I don't know if this is something we should address now, but we have a cents_to_dollars private method in both `SubscriptionCoupon` and `Invoice`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())))(((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "Formatting here and all below: missing space before open bracket for the compound statement."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "Avoid using old mortbay utilities for converting JSON. Uses existing Solr Utils to convert from JSON string."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `command_v2` class.",
+      "reference": "I actually think this wrapping is great, but let's call it `RunCommandOperation`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Maybe it is better to add checking for status code duplications? It can prevent some stupid copy-paste user errors."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change this test.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ") ))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))(())))(((((((((((((((((((((((( error error error error error error",
+      "reference": "This lea should match instr_check_xsp_mangling and be undone. I don't think i#3307 applies here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I like the idea of this being an interface as it makes the test setup a bit easier, thoughts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Nit: I believe the electrum convention is to use `bfh` instead of `bytes.fromhex`. Great catch on this bug!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception, but I don't think it should be an exception.",
+      "reference": "Use a more granular error type. I would recommend `ValueError` in this case."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the playerRequestTrade function.",
+      "reference": "A space after each argument, and an empty line above this if-statement."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Things like this make me wonder whether we should ship a \"development\" and a \"production\" version. I remember the discussions about making things more complex bundling wise but couldn't we omit this line in a \"production\" or \"minimal\" variant of our build? That would save us some bytes here and there. Or are we somehow able to move this line to debug? I though about monkey patching the exported function but that only works in CJS and not ESM AFAIK."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "Maybe rename to `RegisterListener` or `RegisterSubscriber`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////",
+      "reference": "My one concern here is that we are adding a new array allocation for each depth of the tree which could add some non-trivial GC churn. Perhaps this would be okay if we think that refs are used through a tree commonly enough such that they'll get allocated anyway but I'm not sure refs are *that* often used. Every app has a couple, but probably not at every level of their app :/ So maybe the extra bytes are worth it in this case? Though I have no data to back up my hypothesis so I could way off lol."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "We should get rid of this big array and think about a better way to check this."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we cache the result of `Mvx.Resolve()` to avoid a lookup each time?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a try-except block.",
+      "reference": "If you get to this line avg_size_of_message is an undefined value, yet you use it below. You you should set this value to something in the exception block."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "let's just fold this inline in mux.go, no need for the indirection to this new file"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "This bit confused me just now as I was reading through -- turns out this is due to the `{@link}` on line 316. Reading up on this, the alternative seems to be to state the fully qualified name instead. Happy to edit if requested as I don't have a strong view either way (perhaps a small leaning towards keeping the import)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this test is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "There's a unnecessary System.out."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we add the flows only when NodePort is enabled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")\")\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\"),\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",\",",
+      "reference": "ITYM to flip this one..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What's the difference between typescript-eslint/eslint-recommended and typescript-eslint/recommended? I really can't get it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Thinking: Maybe it would be more useful to define this in terms of RTTs. That would also make it easier to switch this to a bool, since we could then pick a reasonable default value. Unless of course an attacker could influence our RTT estimate. Is that the case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this file.",
+      "reference": "Why is this line deleted?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "minor type `boostrap`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((())))))(((((((((())))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Nit: please don't separate imports into groups."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Thinking if it would be nice to have something like `setNothingSelected`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning, but I don't think it should be an error.",
+      "reference": "I think this is a useful InfoLevel message. In production, if webhook client connections suddenly start failing due to change of serving cert, you'd want to see this information in the logs."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Generally, if cast from int to char*, you could cast directly. Because no errors should happen."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a constant, not a constant.",
+      "reference": "Is 10 min too long? What do you think about 1 minute? Unless there are many jobs in this state, I don't expect the CPU overhead to be too high."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add this to the config file. I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "can you remind me why we keep the pointer if it's a `map[string]`? are there other scenarios where the pointer is kept?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "Would it make sense to also add `setMaxParallelism` in addition to this to match the Flink API?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Not needed for actions. `_super(...arguments)` is only needed when you're extending from a base class and want to run the logic in the base class before your own logic"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "I still need to run this code to verify my understanding, but my first reading through makes me think this may need to be `suspendingComponent._vnode` since we set `vnode._hydrating` on the vnode that threw the error (diff/index.js:275), not on `Suspense._vnode` (though we could in Suspense's `_catchError` implementation at the top of this file)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I think it's a good idea to log this as debug, the same way the other branch gets logged."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good fix, but I don't think it's a good fix.",
+      "reference": "1:D100: Docstring missing 35:D101: Docstring missing 37:D102: Docstring missing 42:D101: Docstring missing 44:D102: Docstring missing 57:D102: Docstring missing 66:D101: Docstring missing 69:D102: Docstring missing"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "keeping this as an unexported constant, as importing the role pkg creates a cyclic dependency."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Why `c.RevisionField()` here but `c.opts.RevisionField` just below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "nit: this file diff seems unrelated and probably should have been a separate PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a bool.",
+      "reference": "@sjplimp just checked this API in the latte repository master branch (which is what Install.py downloads) and this still does not provide the 18th argument. We cannot merge this pull request until this is available. i would also suggest to implement a second binding, a function called latte_abiversion() returning an int with an ABI version number (starting with 1). This way, it can be tested, whether the ABI expected by the LAMMPS interface and provided by the library is compatible *before* calling the `latte()` function and risking a segmentation fault."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Is this from debugging?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `AssertTrue`",
+      "reference": "Its betet use MockedObject"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "\"including\"? Since it doesn't take any parameters, I'm not sure how it can update anything else..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this.",
+      "reference": "nit: I'm assuming you have verified this is what the error message should read like"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why do you need that? (real question)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "If I understand the patch correctly the `else` is no longer required."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should keep this flag.",
+      "reference": "Properly describe valid flag values here: `neither` should be replaced with `none` as they parsed below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Can we escalate this to `warn`. It is a major event."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Please move these up to line 86 so the numbers are in order."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Add a docstring to contain the paper link."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Instead of adding the `--target` flag here, the `Target` struct should be set up correctly. Assuming this is for the Raspberry Pi 3, adding it to the `cflags` key of the JSON file should be enough (if not, you can print `config.CFlags()` here to check whether `--target` is already included)."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(())((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "The changes in this file look unnecessary since `rpccontext.AuditRPCWithTypesStatus()` already does this check. Was there a reason you needed to add them?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "you could probably use `const` for both?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the top of the file.",
+      "reference": "This looks like an \"ES Module\" to me. I do not understand this TODO."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Iceberg doesn't use `final` because it is unlikely that this actually helps. In Java 8, final detection is quite good, which is why non-final variables can be used in closures and lambdas. And final doesn't produce different byte code so it can't do much to help at runtime."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string.",
+      "reference": "There's `pushString` to use with C++ strings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a way that we don't have to re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-rerererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererererere",
+      "reference": "qq: Should this include the iptables6-save sim. to the inverse checks above?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "What about async user writers? We could be checking `param.mode == ASYNCHRONOUS_WRITER`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this double check for lombok annotation + specific lombok annotation seems pointless, just keep the second (specific) check. Moreover, since we have a property with ignored annotations... why don't we use it? a user may setup the property and it will be ignored here. Also, this class should probably not extend `AbstractLombokAwareRule` anymore. We have a configurable set of annotations that suppress the warning, defaulting to ALL lombok annotations, yet we only check for `lombok.NoArgsConstructor`... Maybe directly extending `AbstractIgnoredAnnotRule` and settig the default property to `lombok.NoArgsConstructor`? Or, to avoid a breaking API change, keep extending it, but override the default. For 7.0.0 we can change the class hierarchy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "nit: the ordering may be misunderstood, as \"invoked in the same order\" could suggest the passed-in functions are called in-order, but the actual wrapping is LIFO. Some other ways to describe it (don't think any of these are ideal, but maybe it will help you come up with something better), * the handled returned by the first interceptor is executed first * interceptors are applied outside-in (don't like the terms outside/in though) * interceptors are applied in LIFO order, leading to an earlier interceptor's handler being executed before latter interceptor handlers"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We should not use a static import to be consistent with other existing use of the QueryElevationParams."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "No need to check return value?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `import importlib.resources as importlib_resources` or `import importlib.resources as importlib_resources`.",
+      "reference": "~~Feel free to ignore that one, I'll fix things up when regenerating the `requirements.txt`.~~ As for the one below, this smells like a pylint bug..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "it's a bit strange that this doesn't match `aggregationElements` which is what I would expect. I guess I am not familiar enough with go-ipfix."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())",
+      "reference": "Same thing: `num_simd_registers`. Ditto below."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to change the description here.",
+      "reference": "Should be 2.1.1"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the name of this test. I don't think we should change the name of this test.",
+      "reference": "nitpick: `required_subject` doesn't seem to be used here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We can revert this to reduce the diff of the PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Extraneous blank line."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Is this the same import as in the line 20?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in this PR. I don't think we need to do this in this PR, but I don't think we need to do this in this PR.",
+      "reference": "why those additional checks after published? template.version should always be present and greater than zero"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `pod` or `pod` or `pod` or `pod`?",
+      "reference": "I did not see this is used in the controlplane API? Is it for internal use only? Then no need to define it here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's a bug, but I think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "Should we also add a line to print gcnArch?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I merged already so need another PR, but I think this needs to be at the bottom."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "space in key string?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The commends of this function should be updated"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "The docstring is outdated."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Could rename to `ServiceVersionKey` for consistency with the suggestion to rename the TracerSetting."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be printed.",
+      "reference": "I seem to recall a UI issue with this... @akarve I think you didn't like this for some reason..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The `MediaBlockService` commit must be remove"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should test that the number of rules should be exactly the same as the length of SUPPORTED_RETENTION_RES_TYPES.",
+      "reference": "Use a literal constant here, and use `assertEqual`, e.g. `self.assertEqual(2, len(...))` You should also check that the number of rules is correct, i.e. 1 rule for buckets, 0 rules for tables."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to fix this, I'm not sure how to fix it.",
+      "reference": "@Murderlon Should it just say `some future version`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "change looks good.. but, better to make populateVersion to return same object in the case of error.. that avoids lot of complex logic and probable issues"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "invalid operation: exp (variable of type *Service) has no field or method getAddressDetails (from `typecheck`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Probably overkill, but maybe we should be using a fake clock here. I won't push on whatever you decide though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the goroutine safe, but I don't think we should keep the goroutine safe. I think we should keep the goroutine safe, but I don't think we should keep the goroutine safe. I think we should keep the goroutine safe, but I don't think we should keep the goroutine safe. I think we should keep the goroutine safe.",
+      "reference": "If you feel like it, may as well apply all the suggestions below to this test too."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "do we really need a relation or can we just assume INTERSECTS?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good practice.",
+      "reference": "Is this a `MetricKey`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?",
+      "reference": "what's your rationale to pick up this date?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "NIT: I'd have preferred that the new package be called \"utils\", but that's not a big deal."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `aws-sdk-s3` file.",
+      "reference": "Simple Storage **Service**"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `getSolrConfiguration()` method.",
+      "reference": "I think, retrieving the setting could also be done outside the loop. What do you think?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to the `BlockAddedObserver` class.",
+      "reference": "This TODO isn't related to this change. We should remove it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "We chose `info` in the test code for obvious reasons. Changing to `finest` makes debugging harder and noisier."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "I'm not really sure this is worth it. Keep in mind that every special case we add has the potential to introduce new errors and complicates the code further. For common cases that is acceptable, but in this instance I don't think it's beneficial."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: this `if` isn't necessary since we immediately follow it up with a range over the slice, which works fine with a `nil` slice."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Remove this line please."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to make this configurable?",
+      "reference": "why is this is class field? it should be something local within the auto apply template method since we only need this once to process templates and never use again."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I agree with Stephen it's better to invoke getStandards() only once."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "After discussing what ``irregular_dims`` really is, we agreed that we need a better name that makes it clearer that this is more of an xarray concept of irregular dimensions than a holoviews one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to log the container id?",
+      "reference": "This code is new and not tested well. While we may drop the log level before we ship 4.0, right now this is extremely helpful to users."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "this makes sure there is some padding space around the size column"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Put these includes in alphabetical order"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Can this just be an else?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Merge this line with Line7"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`clearfix` is needed to stop the `float:right` content overflowing the list item container."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "Can this be put on the assembly?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Could we rename the parameter to `overrideStatusCode`? The name `alwaysOk` implies that the health check result would be always healthy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this route is the right route, but I don't think this route is the right route. I don't think this route is the right route.",
+      "reference": "\"/schedpolicy\" is repeated, i would make it a constant and use it here and cluster client.go"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Having a second `configuration` arg seems kinda odd to me as an interface. It looks like you're just using it as a form of dependency injection for the tests, right? Part of what makes it seem weird is that it's leaked into all the other orderers where they don't use `configuration` at all. Instead, what do you think about accepting the configuration in `initialize` (and having it default to `RSpec.configuration` in the same way)? To me, the config feels like a bit of state the instance should hold onto rather than being given each time `order` is called. It also means the other orderers wouldn't need to take the odd second argument. Thoughts?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary?",
+      "reference": "This button should also be disabled when in secure mode since it opens a web browser from which you can easily do a lot of insecure stuff."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Should this be done as part of `expireSnapshots`? I'd like to avoid adding a lot of operations to `Table` because it is already a large API."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "I do not think that this type (and its constructor) have to be exported."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why add this? don't think it's correct? for instance, it returns ErrCandidateNotExist (not critical), in this case we should return a receipt with corresponding status"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed anymore, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Instead of creating a new file, put this in tls.go, like right after or before DNSProviderConstructor is defined."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Instead of OC.getLocale() for the default value the default should be the value of the user value 'core' 'lang'. When loading the page this can be added to the parameters by retrieving $this->config->getUserValue($user->getUID(), 'core', 'lang'); in viewcontroller.php."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why interface1? It should be in inner so."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a dict.",
+      "reference": "Ideally, I'd have converted dicts to object but this way was less changes so this way for now."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Why is that test different to line 4022 (allocate is not tested there)? Shouldn't that be consistent?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Should we consider move this expression evaluation to SETUP_INSERT step since it evaluates from queue entry. Also, this expression is not evaluated in ExHbaseAccessVsbbUpsertTcb."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "Don't see any more TODOs here.."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can you extract this out to a constant?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "any testcase for saargs, and tidyargs argument processing?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "@ericstj do you think it is worth combining these two? With the presence of the message meaning it is enabled?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "why not use instance.RootDeviceName?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "not needed, ADIOS2 also needs to check for subfiles. ADIOS2 tries to remove dependency on serial `fstream`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "no need to wrap in new Promise - you can simply throw the exception"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Isn't this testing an implicit config, not a manual config?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "I don't think this is used any more, please remove."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "shouldn't we name abbreviations up-cased? `myId` -> `myID`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "This just always calls refs. I think we need to either hoist ref invocation back out of `setProperty()` (it used to happen during rendering), or wait for component recycling to go away."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Oof. I may have missed this while reviewing #3805"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "why the NOLINTs here? please just alphabetize the headers (should be easier than adding NOLINTs) unless there's a good reason not to..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we maybe return `` instead?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Please use camelCase in new code"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a string, but I don't think it should be a string.",
+      "reference": "Looks like the whitespace is off here. Not sure if there's a space or two too many or if there is an issue with tabs vs. spaces, but you probably want to fix this :)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to use `noConflict()` if you need to access functions covered by `bootstrap.js`.",
+      "reference": "This was just my laziness and I didn't copy the first line. Just remove it together with one empty line. Thanks"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Why did you decide to change CartItemTest but you didnt change QueryBuilderWithRowManipulatorDataSourceTest?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This was sort of a pre-existing bug -- we should be busting our local cache if the key isn't present. However, `KBPKIClient.HasVerifyingKey` already took care of it on that path. This way is better though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in this PR.",
+      "reference": "Should this tag addition for generated files be handled explicitly in `private/model/cli/gen-api/main.go`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do this.",
+      "reference": "You want to return if it's quiet time and notifications during quiet time are **not** enabled. So this is either a logic error or it's bad naming of the setting/field/method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change the redirect_to to https.",
+      "reference": "Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "cool, here (L146 && L148) maybe (repo_private? || force_private?) &&!installation? to prevent double call of installation?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "this error carries a bit more meaning for us, but less meaning for users. we also lose the context of what command produced the failure. I'd prefer to keep the original error message. If we need better identification of GetActiveApp errors, maybe we could address that in the error messages it returns?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a warning, but I don't think it should be a warning.",
+      "reference": "Same: DO NOT USE IN PRODUCTION. Yes we should shout ;)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------",
+      "reference": "This change may be hiding more errors, if we continue to see more."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Beware of exposing the underlying features directly. Any mutable fields should be reset per request."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;",
+      "reference": "This is probably more nuanced than I can feasibly check in a PR review, haha. Was the issue here that `replaceChild()` removes `initialBase` from the DOM before `recollectNodeTree()` invokes `componentWillUnmount()` on the owning component?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "I believe it's misleading name for the condition. I prefer \"element_to_be_disable\" We can have a condition, when element is enabled but we can't click it, because another element overlays above it. So, If we use \"unclickable\" we might mislead people, who use that condition to verify if element can be clicked"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Is there a way to do this?",
+      "reference": "Do we need to expose it? It looks like it is only used in tests and only to obtain the final metrics. I think you can get the same by using `DataFile#lowerBounds` and `DataFile#upperBounds`. It seems `DataWriter` already exposes `toDataFile` that you can use."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good test, but I don't think it's a good test.",
+      "reference": "the test was failing likely due to locale issue. had to increment the date by 1 to make it pass"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "The changes below here can also be undone."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Instead of importing context besides beehivecontext, I'd suggest include golang context functionalities into beehivecontext. To keep channelq only rely on beehive."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `AddProductNutritionFactsData` class.",
+      "reference": "I'm not sure about this one. Are you sure we don't need to initialize this fragment anywhere else?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug.",
+      "reference": "You didn't set a source here, so it will probably fail."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Might be easier to just do `handler{Handler: rpcHandler}` since zero-value of `Deps` is now valid."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could you please add docs for this method?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to a separate class.",
+      "reference": "we should probably `@Deprecated` this implementation to be removed in PMD 7.0.0"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I wonder if 'unix' makes more sense for this now? I was thinking of putting up a 'cleanup' PR - I think I missed a few \"remote\" var names in the first PR, and want to reassess unifying the transport classes that just define `with_connection`. Renaming this could be part of that."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `http://json.schemastore.org/sarif-1.0.0`",
+      "reference": "Do something similar to what was done in JsonTests (can you derive from JsonTests?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Yes, not much we can do here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this in the future.",
+      "reference": "Why do we need this?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `bitcore` module.",
+      "reference": "Would prefer to see an actual script here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "seems reasonable to also want to include the 'to' location?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove the extraAugmentation here.",
+      "reference": "This change is unnecessary."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Just as a note: Is it possible that the select css class is the same as the hover one? If this is true we should choose a different style for the selection css class, to make it more clear to the user I think."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "What about Secrets, are we not also trying to cover those?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `treeobj.h` instead of `treeobj.h`.",
+      "reference": "(commit messge): how about > update internal commit API for RFC 11"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "How long to integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate integrate",
+      "reference": "This will now wait for 2.5 hours, not 90 minutes, if the waiter delay is 5s"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "See this error on console too so I don't think it's just test simulation. For some reason event doesn't show up sometimes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure how to do this. I'm not sure how to do this.",
+      "reference": "We're passing the same thing twice?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't the value in Bootstrap.Data be just a plain string?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\" I\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "@robertpi Isn't this changing the sampling priority when `KeepTraces==false`? The sampling priority could be `AutoReject` or `AutoKeep`, based on the sampling decision (or the user may have specified something else). Seems like we shouldn't be changing it in this case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a URL.",
+      "reference": "The const can also be used in cloud/pkg/cloudhub/servers/httpserver/server.go L46-47?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "Use a constant for `procedures_prototype`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an error, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "This file should probably not be touched as the formatting of the string seems to be a test in itself?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "style nit: missing leading '*'"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "The operationTracer is passed into the processTransaction() method. We should probably pass the no tracing in one in from where it is called."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `PinMode: PinSERCOM0_SPI`, not `PinMode: PinSERCOM0_SPI`.",
+      "reference": "I believe this line was an error, it should have been `sercomRXPad1` to be consistent with the pin numbers. Resolving this ambiguity by following the pin numbers."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the view.",
+      "reference": "May be useful to have the reason here, though clearly not pressing."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think dask_array_module() is a good way to do this.",
+      "reference": "These were inverted before"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "DB is implemented in PR 951"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "move all constants to `pkg/util/constants.go`, these constants had been used in `volume_stats.go` file too. So better to import them."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file is covered by GNU General Public License.",
+      "reference": "Could you revisit the full header and add appropriate spaces after the hashes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "This should either be `hint` that takes a string to render inside of the partial container or probably better you should just render a separate hint field above the code field in the same tab."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this was flapping"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "Please add a check to see if SafeAreaInsets is available. It isn't on all iOS versions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "interpolation here was causing the translation to not get picked up"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "We don't need to disable the flow controller here as in `StatefulWriter`s destructor?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need create_no_window here.",
+      "reference": "I would rather no have this as a `kwarg` as it encourages \"growth\" which lead to an unweildy constructor in other classes. Let's add a method or property to take care of this instead as I think it's usage is going to be quite low."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))\"))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i",
+      "reference": "I just noticed that we use Return here, when we have logically allowed a packet, whereas in the forward chain we use AcceptAction. Do you know why that is?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "There's one for floats but not for ints. The float implementation is non-trivial though which I guess is the argument there."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "If we have a redirection policy for Selected API forwarding, why isn't \"redirect all\" just a special case where they are all Selected?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `FrameworkTally` and `FrameworkCustom` as well.",
+      "reference": "I wouldn't add this. Just completely ignore config if custom reporter is not `nil` in server options."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "What's the meaning about the code?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Would this incorrectly trigger if `loadingUrl.getHost() = \"something.app\"` and `bridge.getHost() = \"app\"`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Note generally it -> It"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does this mean that every call to `configSet.getIndexSchema()` will create a new schema object (if shared schema is not enabled)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this file should be renamed.",
+      "reference": "License header should use the Apache one."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think this makes more sense to be applied within the parser code where we evaluate the `glob` builtin? This function looks generic in the sense of where it can be used, and perhaps no matches is fine in other cases?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the config file.",
+      "reference": "should we validate that AWSRegion has also been set here so that we don't get into the if-block that relies on the ec2 metadata client below?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "maybe naming `version` to `package_version` or something similar can be more descriptive"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Why not just use the type instead?",
+      "reference": "Why was this changed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Should not have snuck in here right? This is a golang 1.17 feature, wii definitely want to update these"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Pundit is unaware of namespacing, however you can still create the class under policies/org_admin/plans_policy.rb. That means, the condition for the unless can be reused in other places too. You would call the policy as OrgAdmin::PlansPolicy.new(current_user).index? after that unless"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message.",
+      "reference": "this warning shouldn't be produced if we configured a cache either"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to create a collection here.",
+      "reference": "what if the collection is already there?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "instead of removing can you reference org.openqa.selenium.TakesScreenshot?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Please revert unrelated changes"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "As far as I know, this will replace only first occurance of Countly, not others, if there are more than one Countly word in localized string"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I suggest, that we move the regex (`[^a-zA-Z0-9_]`) to a separate constant field, because we're using it in multiple places and I think it's quite prone to misspellings."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Feel free to disregard, but I've been trying to use `Mapping` and `Sequence` instead of `Dict` and `List` when possible, because they communicate that the type is immutable, and also are covariant."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `github.com/nats-io/jwt/v2.go` file.",
+      "reference": "No need for blank line here. This block will then be reordered alphabatically."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "let's call it `in-cluster` instead of `local`. less chance of confusion."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `$product->getRef()`",
+      "reference": "Please use camelCase instead of underscore_case"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Ideally, we'd fold the schema into an expanded system_meta, but this is a good first step."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate file for this. I don't think we should have a separate file for this.",
+      "reference": "Is this used?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Should we use `#if NETFRAMEWORK` for consistency with the other projects?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "If it parses failed, both of the `containerName` and `podId` should be the empty strings, it's non-sense to define this error, I suggest just return it."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this.",
+      "reference": "line 26 can be removed i think > applicationId: or('config.unsplashAPI.applicationId','settings.unsplash.applicationId'),"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "To generalize for possible future new enum options."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shall we remove this variable at the end of UTScapy execution?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "What is this checking for? Why is returning the list of interfaces the correct behaviour in this case?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a config item, not a config item.",
+      "reference": "Please name it correctly as Beam ;)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid error.",
+      "reference": "After chatting with Andrew, we think it's better to look for this particular error string that is causing issues (\"connection reset by peer\") instead of blindly retrying on any error we don't know about."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "any reason to not have defaults here like you had before? (ARM)?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Align the parameters of a method call if they span more than one line.",
+      "reference": "This is a change. The old code was just wrong before, but now here (and one other machine-readable place) we expose the start index as 0 for the first item."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid valid",
+      "reference": "This changes the behavior of the parser, right? Any particular reason to do this aside from the fact that you have to since the function takes a const?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why we need this, but I'm not sure why we need this.",
+      "reference": "Given how simple the Portal implementation is, I wonder if we should move it core... Though we'd have to export it which would be more bytes we can't crawl back..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "The more correct way of doing this is `this.s.hooks.clone()` but either way works. Thanks for finding this :+1:"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to add the label selector to the list of podSelectors. I don't think we should add the label selector to the list of podSelectors.",
+      "reference": "Can we update bool to an enum instead of a string? This helps future extensibility"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we share, since this is also being used with gsa18f?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "There can be multiple subrows, so it is not a good idea to use `id` there, as id should identify single unique element. Instead you could just add the id of whole table or of whole crash plugin view"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this test.",
+      "reference": "Why was this assert removed? Shouldn't we check if the file is in the zip?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a log message, not a log message.",
+      "reference": "This logic should be handled at informer handle functions i.e. AddFunc, UpdateFunc, DeleteFunc"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "S1008: should use'return ' instead of 'if  { return  }; return ' (from `gosimple`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it, but I don't think it's the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Just to remove branching, use `defaultTitle` explicitly in the test cases. (Is this gofmt'd?)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I don't think you use this variable anywhere. (You call `SampleTransformer.newBuilder()` below)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this into the `chirp_wrap_job_create` function.",
+      "reference": "The digest is in binary and variable size (the digest size is result if > 0). So we can't use xxstrdup."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "We don't need this additional method."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should have a separate interface for this.",
+      "reference": "We can't do this. Adding a method to an interface is a breaking change. This was an oversight on our part when we converted ClientConfig from a struct to an interface. OutboundConfig was introduced to fix this, the idea being that we should use OutboundConfig everywhere instead of ClientConfig. In case of Dispatcher, we want to use the OutboundConfig and MustOutboundConfig methods instead of ClientConfig, and for streaming, the client needs to attempt to upcast a ClientConfig to OutboundConfig and error out if that's not possible."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why not using the constant `PARTICIPANT_QOS_DEFAULT` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a tuple.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this be `tm_cpp` to match `temporalImp`? (There are multiple CPP implementations, so 'cpp' is ambiguous.)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Need to remove this empty line for rubocop to be happy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "just checking: do we need to remove this because otherwise the `List` operations may not return the entire set of Pods / Namespaces? do you know why we used `alwaysReady` in the first place, I can't remember?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep this in a separate file. I don't think we should keep this in a separate file. I think we should keep this in a separate file. I think we should keep this in a separate file.",
+      "reference": "maybe we can replace `mongoClient.s.options.autoEncryption.cryptdConnectionString` with `options.autoEncryption.cryptdConnectionString`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\")\")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(()))(((())))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "But we're already doing os_switch_lib_tls to app a few lines above, so there is now redundancy we should alleviate."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Under what circumstance would we have a span id already? Is this for testing purposes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "The original text can be read to say \"not waited on by queue...\" meaing that the second queue was supposed to have *waited* for the signal... which is especially confusing when it's the same queue that has signalled the semaphore *twice* without a wait."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"))))))(((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))",
+      "reference": "just clarifying the error messages a bit."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `TelemetryRequestTypes.cs`",
+      "reference": "Have those (and other data like conf...) shared across tracers?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file should be renamed to `apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0`. It should be renamed to `apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0`.",
+      "reference": "could we add this file only when we need one?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right place to put it.",
+      "reference": "This may not even be needed."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a new field to the test.",
+      "reference": "Capitalisation seems inconsistent here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it's necessary.",
+      "reference": "maybe better Error(string text) and Error(Exception ex) separately?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "can you leave the old one in too please? at least for now, otherwise anyone using it now will break."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Trailing tab, remove it in another PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I'm not sure why this is needed?",
+      "reference": "what about merging the error checking logic to within `errShouldUnload`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this, but I don't think it's the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Probably want Topic.find_by_slug! to handle bogus topics. The next line will try to load articles off of nil otherwise."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Should it really be done on test side?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Can we elaborate on why? I'm guessing because we need the execution role to call FE stopTask during `cleanupTask`, but would be good if we make it clear here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be `validateFlowExporterConfig()` or `validateFlowExporterConfig()`",
+      "reference": "is there a reason why this is not called from inside `validate`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": ":+1: I much prefer this style for functions with more than a few arguments."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Are these mutually exclusive options (parameters vs qualifiers)? If parameters aren't supported, may want to consider throwing an exception for \"hasParameters\". If parameters and qualifiers are both legit options, then maybe change this to `if (hasQualifiers) {... } if(!hasQualifiers &&!hasParameters)`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Why did you remove this line?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think it would be better to have a message that says \"Invalid indices\" and a message that says \"Invalid indices\"",
+      "reference": "Very unclear error message. Remember that these are messages that your users see. Please be more specific"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should move this to `WindowsServer.Platform` instead of `WindowsServer.Platform`",
+      "reference": "Can we add these when we need them"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I believe you can simplify this to simply `return array_unique(array_filter($authors));` -- the default behavior of array_filter is to filter out empty elements, so the callback should not be required in this situation. Do you mind giving it a try and updating the PR if it works?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((",
+      "reference": "Would it make sense to log a debug warning here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "\"in the keystore\", but nevermind"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a bool, not a bool.",
+      "reference": "This should be done in a separate PR."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should log.error(\"found running player\");",
+      "reference": "Rather than this maybe `Text.sanitize` would be better here"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "lot of places setting default 'false' to static value - noise in PR"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I think you should use `$event->getOriginalFileUrl()` instead of `$sourceFilePath` here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "nit: It's a matter of taste, but it would be tighter if this is called `api_quota`."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "I noticed in all of these we now have to import the PrecompiledContract under testing. Could also rename the package these are in s/precompiles/precompile to keep them in the same package as they are elsewhere."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a bug, but I don't think it's a bug.",
+      "reference": "doubt this matters..."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Gets updated versions of `LOOPBACK_INTERFACE`, `LOOPBACK_NAME` when importing scapy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "checking for ref. equality is probably fine here, but it takes a reader longer to navigate the code and figure out whether ref equality is really wanted here vs just using `equals()`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "looks like it's not used? Do we plan to use it in the future?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good choice.",
+      "reference": "I think this is an unrelated remark. I thought we had moved toward the practice of using \"Config\" as the structure name, and Option as a functional argument (`func(*Config)`), and Options as a `[]Option`. See api/trace `StartConfig` and `StartOption`, for example. That's why I prefer this struct be called Config."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "nitpick: superfluous parenthesis"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "If, for a given integration, the tag/measure is always set, it should be added to the strongly-typed tags (here for instance, in GraphQLTags). This way, the underlying dictionary is allocated only in the rare case where users add custom tags"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "The position change of this line may be a hard fork."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "id is unsigned"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option.",
+      "reference": "It looks like Puppet doesn't provide type validation for options and we don't provide it ourselves as part of the function. Is that something we'd want to do at some point?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "Looks like this didn't need to change."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "I don't understand why this is here and what's the intention with it? Can you elaborate what's the reasoning behind this change?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this interface is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "I think @sergeybykov converted (wanted to convert) all `shardID` to `int32` from `int64`. Please check with him."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This will only fix client side (so showing it in-game) server still gonna hold invalid values I guess?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this be `cls.param.warning`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This spec can be modified, giving you extra strength (Check this fetch key doesn't work and therefore returns `nil`)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Could we not just always include `self.config.options.listen_host`? If that is empty, the `address[0]` check should also never be true."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "Why not just access `ops` directly like before?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ")))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "Is there even a need to keep the bool?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this test.",
+      "reference": "wrap to stay under 80 characters"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "`return NULL` is more clear than `throw` at least in my reading, and consistent with #3362."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Both of these are important. Without it, locust won't find my libraries in the cloud."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This should remain as `ListServices`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this package is needed anymore.",
+      "reference": "If no tests, remove this file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "This will require changes to the docs. I suggest searching the gh-pages branch for the previous variable name."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "`RemoteHandler` is used in nvda_slave and slave does not have access to `globalVars` currently. Perhaps `globalVars.appDir` should be set to `None` in `globalVarrs by default and set to NVDA directory when they're imported for the first time."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it's a good idea, I'm not sure if it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "In case there is more configuration to be added to the \"inmem\" metrics later (however unlikely that is), we may want to play it safe and create an `InMemConfig` struct and include the disabled flag there. This also gives the config symmetry across the plugins."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "I'll need to pull this out of here since we're sharing this in other tests. Same for `procurement_spec.rb`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.",
+      "reference": "what about `observer` as a var name here (and below) rather than `obs`? -- would be clearer, imo!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be an exception, but I don't think it's worth it.",
+      "reference": "could you change this to instead of being a `try.. except` be `message = message.get('message')`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think we should keep the copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright copyright",
+      "reference": "Add space between License and nameapace"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "should we have a `before_filter` for auth here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "@vincepri I know we discussed moving this up and only calling it once, but I didn't (quickly) see an easy way to generate the right event based on the appropriate action (attach vs detach). Happy to move it around if you have suggestions."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add a column to the table.",
+      "reference": "Can we use record.update here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't the exact case option matter here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do it.",
+      "reference": "Errr, why haven't we noticed this until now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this in a separate commit.",
+      "reference": "It's a little spooky that this method throws exception if you try to set the attribute to a different value than it was set before, but then does leave the new value set in the attributes?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be a constant.",
+      "reference": "Please only increment by 1."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this should be changed.",
+      "reference": "Sorry I might have missed some context, but what's the reason you choose `Period` over `Duration` or `Interval`? (Thumbs up for using `org.joda.time` instead!)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "Please check if is it possible to mark it as private. What's more please add this to the TypeScript definition file."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "Maybe move this to `util.h`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "oops. this won't work will it"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "@strib I assumed this is what you meant; but let me know if I'm wrong!"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should do that.",
+      "reference": "I believe the error has changed"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should add this to the `#include_constraints?` method.",
+      "reference": "Lint/UnneededDisable: Unnecessary disabling of Naming/PredicateName."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "Should this be removed now?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "streamHandle sounds vague to me. Can you be more specific?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Does everything on cursorState belong in the command options?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "This is clever, but I do admit I think it's kinda weird. We can go with it for now and fix it later if people complain."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "the variable names are not entirely clear. \"bucket\" is essentially the regex that follows gcs naming pattern, right? if so, it should be changed to bucketregex. and then bucketregex, gsregex should be changed to something more specific to what pattern the regex is supposed to match."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\")\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"",
+      "reference": "I think `ApiModelT` would be clearer than `T`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "This file is part of the RDKit. This file is part of the RDKit.",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this be 2019?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "We should consider giving this state a more generic name which could be used for flows in similar state in non-containerized Azkban. For instance in the event of a bare-metal executor crashing we could the switch any flows assigned to that executor to this state. Something like `EXECUTE_INFRA_FAILED`, better alternatives should be possible though."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "))))))LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC",
+      "reference": "This should allow `role=definition` and `role=term`, possibly also `role=list`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should this use `boolean` instead of `Boolean`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this test.",
+      "reference": "Currently in our Zipkin tests, only one passed parameter would instantiate a Resource and checks for its tags populating. I left the If(UseTestResource) clause in the code in case we would like to return to the old resource tag checking, but if it makes more sense I can remove that parameter entirely."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea.",
+      "reference": "While this is potentially convenient it seems off topic for the PR/Issue. Also if it is kept, in the realm of taste/style I tend to not use get/set/is for things that are not properties of the object. maybe hasLiveNode(String node) thus someone using it might write `if (zkReader.hasLiveNode(\"foo\"))...` which reads quite nicely."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right path to this file, but I don't think it's the right path to this file.",
+      "reference": "What's the difference between blogSvid and the SVID above? Looks like the functions that use these aren't being called currently - can they be removed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "How do we get the value from Nethermind?",
+      "reference": "can you add numbers with this change? the CLI is a javascript engine and it can worh number - java adds strings vi concatenation"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "Doctrine\\Doctrine\\Query\\Cast.php?",
+      "reference": "Shouldn't this `TEXT` also be dependent on the platform, then?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Can we name this `TableObject`? I'm not a big fan of the `I` prefix for interfaces and that's not really used in Go. Is it also possible to have the method be unexported? I don't know if that's possible. If it's not, this is good. If it is possible, I'd prefer this method to be unexported."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good idea, but I don't think it's a good idea.",
+      "reference": "If tbb.h is included, there is no big sense to include other TBB headers."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is a hostname not starting with a bucket name?",
+      "reference": "Let's use the same `S3_HOSTNAME_PATTERN` as above here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I think this should be a `log` or a `log` or a `log` or a `log` or a `log` or a `log`?",
+      "reference": "This shouldn't be here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to do this.",
+      "reference": "A `case` statement may be simpler here."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need to do this.",
+      "reference": "why are we adding the current tag count to new tag count?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is a good option, but I don't think it's a good option.",
+      "reference": "Are you writing \"none\" to file content? no good"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the correct way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Should we allow `string|string[]` here?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Is there a reason for logging `error.message` specifically, maybe log the whole error object?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "is not a AspNet instrumentation?",
+      "reference": "Why is this needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is necessary, but I don't think it is necessary.",
+      "reference": "Nothing. We only expect container-connected events when going via the plugin, not the proxy."
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is needed.",
+      "reference": "We might want to introduce some randomness here in case there are multiple completely separate Preact installations running, i.e. 2 widgets as those will be two roots with a resetting `_domDepth`"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the right way to go about it.",
+      "reference": "this seems a bit wrong no? why is this change needed?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "Still confusing. Why don't we return something like `'Fee too low: expected X but found Y'`?"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should change this to `Ports []int`",
+      "reference": "Should be from lowercase `json:\"ports\"` the same is defined in MarshalJSON"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we should remove this line.",
+      "reference": "Simple Notification **Service** (singular)"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think we need this.",
+      "reference": "This code should be executed in NashornEngineFactory"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": "I don't think this is the best way to do this.",
+      "reference": "this is not so great as it sets the global rand seed. in tests that invoke this method multiple times for whatever reason, the global seed would be overridden every time the constructor would be called and the instances would have a different seed after every constructor call. it would be better to just pass a new source here as a parameter and do the same within the test. it should simplify things and clean this up"
+    },
+    {
+      "prediction": ":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",
+      "reference": "This looks inverted to me: if `--rpc-require-chainid-in-txs=true`, then shouldn't `unprotectedTransactionsAllowed == false`? Suggest changing this variable to `requireTxReplayProtection` or similar. I think the flag name could be clearer as well, maybe: `--require-tx-replay-protection`."
+    }
+  ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file