Front end developer specialising in JavaScript and React. Experienced in all aspects of modern front end development. Passionate about making accessible, secure and performant software.
I pretty much agree with all the points you've made. But I wanted to elaborate on the opposite point as well. Code reviews still have good benefits. For example juniors can learn more by reviewing the code, the author may have missed some small things, other teams get visibility of the codebase so knowledge is shared, etc.
Also code reviews aren't done in a vacuum, they are a very small part of the entire software development process. If the software development process is lacking, then code reviews are strongly affected because doing a code review on a monolith is pretty useless, as you said. However if the software development process is good, this code reviews only provide the benefits.
The software development process can lack with things like:
Frequent large stories.
Long-lived branches.
Bad testing standards, meaning you can't trust your code actually works.
Bad coding standards, meaning that code breaks easily and is difficult to change.
Cowboy coding. Coding whatever you want without consulting the team as needed. This is solved by communication, like your suggestion of "design reviews".
TLDR: I agree with all the points you've made, however code reviews still have good benefits. The entire software development process has to be good for code reviews to be beneficial and not useless. The main problem is probably companies adding code reviews because of an agile checklist, rather than focusing on a good software development process overall.
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.
I pretty much agree with all the points you've made. But I wanted to elaborate on the opposite point as well. Code reviews still have good benefits. For example juniors can learn more by reviewing the code, the author may have missed some small things, other teams get visibility of the codebase so knowledge is shared, etc.
Also code reviews aren't done in a vacuum, they are a very small part of the entire software development process. If the software development process is lacking, then code reviews are strongly affected because doing a code review on a monolith is pretty useless, as you said. However if the software development process is good, this code reviews only provide the benefits.
The software development process can lack with things like:
TLDR: I agree with all the points you've made, however code reviews still have good benefits. The entire software development process has to be good for code reviews to be beneficial and not useless. The main problem is probably companies adding code reviews because of an agile checklist, rather than focusing on a good software development process overall.