go-code-review

# Go Code Review A repeatable, opinionated review pass for Go code. Read the diff file by file, walk each topic in order, flag findings with file:line references, then group by severity. ## Core Rules 1. **Mechanical checks first.** Never start a human review until `gofmt`, `go vet`, and `golangci-lint` are clean. They free your attention for what tools cannot catch. 2. **One file at a time, topic by topic.** Walk the diff in order and apply each topic checklist below. Switching topics mid-file loses the thread. 3. **Every finding cites a rule.** `file:line` plus the rule name (`go-naming: initialisms`) — never a bare opinion. 4. **Severity is non-negotiable.** Must-Fix (correctness/security/data-loss/broken contract) blocks merge; Should-Fix (significant design or style issue); Nit (small preference, flag once). 5. **Drop what you cannot defend.** After flagging, re-read and remove any finding you would not stand behind in a thread. 6. **Praise non-trivial improvements.** A review without acknowledgement teaches only avoidance. ## Review Procedure 1. Run mechanical checks: `gofmt -d ./...`, `go vet ./...`, `golangci-lint run ./...`, `go test ./... -race -short`. 2. Read the diff one file at a time. For each file, walk the topic checklists below in order. 3. Flag every issue with `file:line` and the rule name that justifies it. 4. After all files are reviewed, re-read flagged items and drop any you cannot justify. 5. Group findings by **Must Fix / Should Fix / Nit** usin...