I've wondered about this. Anecdotally, the place I've worked with the best quality didn't do code review (maybe three "serious" user-visible bugs during the 8 years I was there, one of which was a fab issue that couldn't have been caught with any amount of code review).https://twitter.com/skamille/status/1169765800829435904 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @danluu
I believe code reviews, done well, are primarily about training and team building, not reducing bugs.
2 replies 4 retweets 44 likes -
Replying to @davidcrawshaw @danluu
That said, it is still worth questioning their cost/benefit! The modern code review consensus has been promoted by tech companies with enough revenue to hide any costs. The problem is what I think of as the value of code reviews is hard to measure.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @davidcrawshaw
My feeling (just a feeling, I don't have evidence for this either way) is that pair programming works better for training than code reviews. I suspect actual training also works better, but since no one does that it's hard to compare.
2 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @danluu @davidcrawshaw
I've worked at two companies that are probably P99+ in how much explicit training they offer, but they're not even in the same league as what you get if you walk down to your local go/chess/bridge club, let alone what you get if you're a serious amateur athlete or go player.
3 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @danluu @davidcrawshaw
One fact about athletes is that there is limited time that can be put to directly productive use (competition), as opposed to indirectly productive use (training). This isn't obviously true about software developers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hyperpape @davidcrawshaw
Directionally agree, but I think most programmers put in a lot of garbage time, so it's not like people don't have free time at work. Most devs I talk to say that they're happy if they get four productive hours of work in, but most seem to average at least twice that many hours.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Of course there are exceptions to this, I know a few people who can consistently do 10+ hours of focused work a day and I know a handful of people (more than a few) who don't sit around to put in garbage time when they're not focused, but both of these seem relatively rare.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danluu @davidcrawshaw
I think there's probably something to that, but it's an assumption that you can replace garbage hours with training and have it be effective. You probably can, but maybe you still can't do 8 productive hours of both.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm thinking of mathematicians who say they only do 4 hours/day don't then say they spend another 4 training. Though, perhaps that's just because they're in universities, and other things take up their time.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I think my opinion on this has too many disclaimers to really discuss reasonably on Twitter, happy to discuss over coffee sometime if you happen to visit SF :-).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.