crafting better code reviews
@vaidehijoshi
why do I care so much about code reviews to begin with?
👩🏽💻
💭
😃
😍
🤗
👎
💪
😟
👩🏽💻
💭
👍
😝
🎉
👩🏽💻
💭
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
👍
LGTM
LGTM
LGTM
LGTM
LGTM
🚨
🔥
🚨
🔥
🔥
🚨
🚨
🚨
👩🏽🚒
🙈
oh no.
we really got this code review thing down!
lol j/k NOPE
we really got this code review thing down!
There must be a better way of doing code reviews!
...Right?
Theory
Practice
Theory
Code Complete
catching problems at the “lowest-value” stage
“quality gates”
🤔
- multiple 👀 on code
- 🔄 bug fixing
- fewer 🔥 when someone leaves
inspections
defect-detection
not correction
short reviews
Code Complete, 2nd Edition,
Steve McConnell
walk throughs
working meetings
Peer Reviews in Software: A Practical Guide,
Karl E. Wiegers
Practice
Energy
Substance
Who is doing the review?
How much time are they spending on it?
Energy
large commits/PR's, no context
unequal reviews (jr vs. sr)
second-class citizens
What exactly are they saying or doing while reviewing?
And how?
Substance
tons of comments < conversation
style/syntax vs. content/semantics
egotistical, rather than empathetic
👩🏽💻
commit hooks
PR templates
screenshots/gifs, explanations
linters
assign specific reviewers
small, concise, encapsulated work
small things
👩🏽💻
develop empathy on your team, review everyone
push for a culture that values vulnerability — both in actions and in words
call out the good stuff
have a conversation
big things
it👏er👏ate👏
iterate
iterate
I love code reviews in theory.
