Code review is a vital practice for software development teams to ensure high-quality code, identify bugs, improve performance, and foster collaboration and learning. However, code review can also be challenging, time-consuming, and frustrating if not done well. In this article, you will learn some tips and best practices for reviewing code with your team effectively and efficiently. Top experts in this article Selected by the community from 105 contributions. Learn more - In addition to the fantastic comments above, a good code review tool needs to make it easier to look at changes per iteration as many reviews end up being much different than when they started. The biggest issue I have seen is the loss of motivation when a lot of time is spent between receiving feedback, implementing the updates and resolving feedback comments. A good review tool provides a way to nudge the participants when there is lack of activity.
- Code review is a human-driven process. Human input is important and will always remain important. However, it’s worth exploring ways to automate certain aspects of the code review process whenever possible. By automating mechanical tasks, we can save time and effort. Investing in the right tools can bring significant benefits. For example: ✅ Static Code Analysis Tools can help you find many issues in your code, like, security issues, redundant code, technical debt, etc. ✅ Prehooks can automatically run all tests, linters, formatters, or code review tools. These can be triggered at the point of commit (pre-commit, post-commit), merge (pre-submit), etc. Authors can get reviews on their code before passing it to the human reviewer.
- my teamwork Reviews code in following ways: Automated Tools: We utilize automated code analysis tools and linters to catch common issues and ensure adherence to coding standards. Documentation: Detailed documentation and comments in the code help reviewers understand its purpose and functionality. Version Control: We use version control systems like Git to track code changes, making it easier to review and revert if needed. Code Review Tools: We employ code review tools such as GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket to streamline the process and track comments. Testing: Code reviews may involve testing the code changes to ensure they work as intended.
- In my team, we have a robust process of how we deploy any code, what's the scene in your team? Some simple things that you should add if missing - Manageable PR Size: It's wise to limit PRs to around 500 lines of code changes. Smaller PRs are easier to understand and review. Test Reporting: Include test results from both local and staging environments in your PR. This transparency reassures reviewers about the code's reliability. Merging Safeguards: Configure settings that prevent merging without proper approval. Design Documentation: Even if a reviewer wasn't part of the development process, they can understand the changes, their purpose, and their alignment with the project's design and objectives. These things will help a lot :)
- Teleconferences still rule and enhanced screen sharing helps bridge understanding between the code presenters and their reviewers. Regardless of the tools for presentation, code reviews must provide evidence of having solved a problem, adherence to an approved design, standards, and security constraints. At the end of the code review, the reviewers must communicate in writing what the purpose of the code review was for first-timers, the revelation of what code has been approved as well as what has not passed with clear recommendations for remediation. You still need source code control to preserve the history of changes. In a year, all the players may have changed. All verbal exchanges are likely lost. Only the written record remains.
- Some simple but practical examples for writing clean codes: 1. Use descriptive names in Variable&functions 2. Use empty lines to create a readable code 3. Do not send more than three parameters into a function(If we need to use more than three parameters, we can send one object to the function ) 4. Remember the functions must do only one thing 5. Functions must be small(If you need to do a function with many lines, you must consider that maybe it is more accurate to use a class instead of a function. Remember your function must do only one thing.) 6. Reduce the number of characters in a line 7.Make less comments. Your code should be descriptive and require fewer comments. 8. Learn Design Patterns
- I'd say this is the part that can (and possibly should) be automated as much as possible. Enforcing unified code style is easy with reasonably strict linter. I prefer strict no-config linters (such as ktfmt for Kotlin) that don't even allow for any discussion on how things should look. They simply have to look the way the linter mandates. Once everyone gets used to the "no discussion" policy, it's liberating. Less time spent on arguing about code style and more on actual coding 👍 If there are rules or best practices that you use on top of what your linter enforces, just write your own rules for automated checks. It saves a lot of time during CRs (no need to repeat yourself all the time).
- We teach our developers how to perfectly masterize `git rebase -i` and `git add -p`. The atomicity of the commits is one of the key aspect for efficient review. Especially, don't merge cosmetics changes, refactoring and new features. Usually, a good PR start by refactoring the existing code to prepare the new feature (so the reviewers check that nothing is broken by these commits), then the new feature is implemented. The cosmetics changes must be placed in separate patches. Thus, the difficult changes are not polluted with cosmetics changes.
- When you request a code review, it's crucial to provide your reviewers with the necessary context and explanations to help them understand your code changes effectively. This process ensures a smoother and more productive review process.
- I've realized the true value of objective and constructive code reviews. It's not just about identifying potential issues but also understanding the context and the rationale behind the solutions implemented. Time-boxing each review is essential to maintain focus and provide actionable feedback without getting lost in the details. It encourages a culture of appreciation, fostering a positive and collaborative environment. Moreover, being open to different perspectives during reviews can be a rich source of learning and growth, fostering innovation and excellence in our code quality. It's a collaborative effort that goes beyond mere quality checks, serving as a platform for teamwork and continuous improvement.
- Understanding an author's intent is much easier when legibility is a team priority. Reviews are a team exercise, and objective, constructive feedback tends to flow more freely when goals are clear, diffs are small, and commit history is clean.
- A code review is also a form of communication. Sometimes it is not even that important to formally review the quality of the code, but to keep track of what is happening in the codebase. People may not learn to be better programmers, but they will learn about the system.
- Agree here. Management of the process is a symbiotic relationship with governance of the same (continuous improvement). Have meaningful and evolving metrics that the teams are behind to minimize risk. E.g. total defects equaling zero doesn’t mean it functions to spec or is without risk.
- In my opinion code review is a very small but crucial step in the development cycle. It must start with defining the clear guidelines around how the code should be written. Following are some of the things we must have in our guidelines. 1. Naming conventions for classes, variables, functions, properties based on different access modifiers. 2. How the child members should be organised. 3. Best practices to be followed. 4. How many lines of code we should have in a single function, class. And the last and very important point which I personally follow and also request my team to follow is before sending the review to others we must review our own code against all the guidelines. This saves a lot of time spent on code review.
- When I review code with my team, we follow a structured process. We start by establishing coding standards and guidelines to ensure consistency. Using a code review tool, we assign reviewers with expertise in the relevant area. Each reviewer independently examines the code before the review meeting, where we discuss findings and provide specific, constructive feedback. We maintain a positive atmosphere and encourage collaboration. After addressing feedback, we approve and merge the code, documenting the review for future reference. Continuous improvement is key, as we strive to make our code review process more efficient and effective.
Software Development Software Development
Rate this articleWe created this article with the help of AI. What do you think of it? Thanks for your feedbackYour feedback is private. Like or react to bring the conversation to your network. Report this article See all More relevant readingHelp improve contributions Mark contributions as unhelpful if you find them irrelevant or not valuable to the article. This feedback is private to you and won’t be shared publicly. How do you politely ask for a code review?1 Explain the context. The first thing you should do when asking for a code review is to provide some context for your code. ... . 2 Highlight the changes. The next thing you should do is to highlight the main changes that you made in your code, and explain why you made them. ... . 3 Ask specific questions. ... . 4 Be polite and grateful.. How do you ask for code help?How to ask for programming help. The ask. Very often a person asks a question something like this: “If I have rows in a table, how do I sum them up?” ... . The reality. It isn't always this easy to formulate questions. ... . The concern. Privacy. ... . The result. Give people willing to give you free help all the details you can get.. How do you review your code?5 code review best practices. Create a code review checklist. ... . Introduce code review metrics. ... . Ensure your feedback justifies your stance. ... . Don't review more than 200-400 lines of code at a time. ... . Supplement your best practices with automation.. How do I pull a code review request?Starting a review. Under your repository name, click Pull requests.. In the list of pull requests, click the pull request you'd like to review.. On the pull request, click Files changed. ... . Optionally, filter the files to show only the files you want to review or use the file tree to navigate to a specific file.. |
