Head of Software @Holaluz, trying to create a better future for everyone. Looking to share ideas, knowledge & code. Before: @Thoughtworks @ClimatePartner
Nice & clean written article 🙂.
I want to say, code reviews, are a generally overused in practice, and that shows on the amount of articles I have seen around it lately.
Personally I must disagree on this being a good practice and the value expresed in this post. As humans we are unable to detect bugs, performance and security issues, specially with a low context of a peer reviewer that has not worked on it. Our brain is not an execution engine, is an simulation engine, meaning is not factual.
Its also important to notice that code reviews as explained here relate to an async process, so a lot of waste has been already generated as the feedback is generated at the end of the development cicle and provided as a whole, again without the capability to demonstrate if that feedback is actually factual.
Peer reviews are good but there are other methods that provide a better return on investment, like pair programming. Async code reviews, alias pull requests, where only created for zero trust environments (OSS), and highly distributed teams.
By experience, please dont PR if you dont need to, find a more efective peer review process.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Nice & clean written article 🙂.
I want to say, code reviews, are a generally overused in practice, and that shows on the amount of articles I have seen around it lately.
Personally I must disagree on this being a good practice and the value expresed in this post. As humans we are unable to detect bugs, performance and security issues, specially with a low context of a peer reviewer that has not worked on it. Our brain is not an execution engine, is an simulation engine, meaning is not factual.
Its also important to notice that code reviews as explained here relate to an async process, so a lot of waste has been already generated as the feedback is generated at the end of the development cicle and provided as a whole, again without the capability to demonstrate if that feedback is actually factual.
Peer reviews are good but there are other methods that provide a better return on investment, like pair programming. Async code reviews, alias pull requests, where only created for zero trust environments (OSS), and highly distributed teams.
By experience, please dont PR if you dont need to, find a more efective peer review process.