`Nit:` (haha) I think a better person to talk to this about is @sedited as an actual project maintainer - I have zero commits to Bitcoin Core and I intend to keep it that way. There are things I want to remain an independent user of!

Personally, (on any other repo, haha) I'd do this:

1. Always mention a nit. Review-done-right is the most expensive part of any codebase, so early flagging is good flagging. [^1]
2. Always prefix it with `nit:`, so that it is clear that it's not a showstopper finding.
3. Don't be afraid to make a mistake sometimes, as long as you're willing to make them at-most-once.

> In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter. 

Per my above rationale, it absolutely does matter. It helps when reviewing now to see the nit, rather than having to context switch into that code later once more and think about it again. Human minds (at least of code reviewers) aren't _that_ different from LLMs in terms of context resets!

> Wouldn't it just look like I'm showing off 

Just mention it, don't make a show out of it. Stay humble and spend effort.

> I'm glad you're here so I can ask you this

Aww.. I'm glad you're here too `<3`

[^1]: **especially on Bitcoin Core** where every little nit is not just technical debt, but social debt because it is another PR that needs to be reviewed by 10s of people. Catch 'em while they're hot!

optimism

, I want to know what you think about this; my insecurity is holding me back:

. When I learned what it's for, I also learned about 

, which afaict does the same thing. I also noticed that tests usually use 

. I now consider mentioning this as a nit in my review when I'm done.

 it's a nit. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter. Also, the other reviews are about more important things. Nobody else mentioned it. Isn't this nit just distracting, then? Wouldn't it just look like I'm showing off that I know about 

I might only mention it when I also have something more important to mention.

Anyway, I guess my question is: Would you mention this as a nit? Or is this too much of a nit even for a nit?

I'm glad you're here so I can ask you this, but I’m sad I need to ask someone this instead of just making a decision on my own

Stacker Saloon

saloon

@optimism, I want to know what you think about this; my insecurity is holding me back:

I'm reviewing [_Add a "tx output spender" index_](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/changes).

I was confused by `-whitelist=noban@127.0.0.1` [in the tests](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539/changes#diff-545cf7d4b81dd480834d0d00e1e414906bd8c374ad63b529eeec7bddc6ddfea4R18-R22). When I learned what it's for, I also learned about `self.noban_tx_relay = True`, which afaict does the same thing. I also noticed that tests usually use `self.noban_tx_relay` instead of a manual `-whitelist`. I now consider mentioning this as a nit in my review when I'm done.

But I'm not sure, *because* it's a nit. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter. Also, the other reviews are about more important things. Nobody else mentioned it. Isn't this nit just distracting, then? Wouldn't it just look like I'm showing off that I know about `self.noban_tx_relay`? lol

I might only mention it when I also have something more important to mention.

Anyway, I guess my question is: Would you mention this as a nit? Or is this too much of a nit even for a nit?

<sub>_I'm glad you're here so I can ask you this, but I’m sad I need to ask someone this instead of just making a decision on my own_</sub>