Anyone have pointers to good resource about *in-person* code reviews (including whether they’re a good idea)?
Conversation
In particular, I'm interested in learning about benefits of code review ASIDE from finding defects, and whether in-person improves them.
8
Tends more towards rubber-stamping, less towards reflection and care. Procedurally, it’s more disruptive too.
1
I think our procedure could stand a little disruption at this point. :) Do you have other ways of sharing knowledge?
2
Code review is an outstanding way of sharing knowledge. Maybe your code review culture is not working well? :/
1
1
Our code review culture isn’t working poorly, but I think it could be more universally beneficial.
2
Doing them in-person makes them inaccessible to future parties.
1
2
Very good point. I was thinking there would be a stenographer, but I also know how easily that breaks down.
1
Replying to
One of my least favorite things about 🍎 was how many engineers’ commits are just a rdar://, and the Radar log just has a hash.
Replying to
My current job is the same; most just commit with the item number and item title. I hate it
Replying to
Yeah, good problem diagnosis and commit messages are underrated and undervalued.
Replying to
Tying code review, Radar, and source control together would've made a lot of things I tried to do there easier.
1
As it is, it's almost impossible to tie lines of code to the Radars they're fixing, let alone causing.
1
Show replies