Upgrade to Pro
— share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …
Speaker Deck
Features
Speaker Deck
PRO
Sign in
Sign up for free
Search
Search
The Art of Code Review
Search
Sponsored
·
Your Podcast. Everywhere. Effortlessly.
Share. Educate. Inspire. Entertain. You do you. We'll handle the rest.
→
John Cinnamond
May 09, 2016
Programming
700
4
Share
The Art of Code Review
A talk about Code Review, given at LRUG in May 2016
John Cinnamond
May 09, 2016
More Decks by John Cinnamond
See All by John Cinnamond
Go Lift
jcinnamond
0
2.1k
Theory
jcinnamond
0
1.9k
The Point of Objects
jcinnamond
0
140
Complexity
jcinnamond
1
250
Other Decks in Programming
See All in Programming
TSKaigi2026-静的解析への投資がAI時代のコード品質を支える ── カスタムESLintルールの設計と運用
hayatokudou
6
1.3k
権限チェックの一貫性を型で守る TypeScript による多層防御
mnch
4
920
開発体験を左右するライブラリの API 設計 - GraphQL スキーマ構築ライブラリから考える #tskaigi
izumin5210
2
1.2k
さぁV100、メモリをお食べ・・・
nilpe
0
110
自動レビューエンジンの実装と運用 ~レビューのない世界へ~
kurukuru1999
2
280
タクシーアプリ『GO』の バックエンド開発のおける AI利活用と若者のすべて
pyama86
3
1.8k
今さら聞けないCancellationToken
htkym
0
200
GitHub Copilot CLIのいいところ
htkym
2
1.2k
AIエージェントの隔離技術の徹底比較
kawayu
0
440
Sans tests, vos agents ne sont pas fiables
nabondance
0
170
要はバランスからの卒業 #yumemi_grow
kajitack
0
200
AI時代の仕事技芸論 — ソフトウェア開発で「遊ぶように働く」職人的熟達のすすめ
kuranuki
1
440
Featured
See All Featured
Accessibility Awareness
sabderemane
1
130
Organizational Design Perspectives: An Ontology of Organizational Design Elements
kimpetersen
PRO
1
710
Measuring Dark Social's Impact On Conversion and Attribution
stephenakadiri
2
200
DBのスキルで生き残る技術 - AI時代におけるテーブル設計の勘所
soudai
PRO
65
55k
Speed Design
sergeychernyshev
33
1.8k
XXLCSS - How to scale CSS and keep your sanity
sugarenia
250
1.3M
Building a A Zero-Code AI SEO Workflow
portentint
PRO
0
540
Scaling GitHub
holman
464
140k
Navigating Weather and Climate Data
rabernat
0
200
We Analyzed 250 Million AI Search Results: Here's What I Found
joshbly
1
1.3k
A designer walks into a library…
pauljervisheath
211
24k
Mobile First: as difficult as doing things right
swwweet
225
10k
Transcript
@jcinnamond THE ART OF CODE REVIEW
Code review is weird
We usually value… Collaboration Teamwork Removing distractions
You write some code Someone else comes along and points
out all your mistakes
S talkhub Talks Issues Pull requests Settings Actually, `Collaboration` and
`Teamwork` are saying the same thing search This talk
Code reviews are… Confrontational Egoistic Expensive Disruptive
REVIEWS VS HUGS 0 75 150 225 300 REVIEWS
So why bother?
Studies show code review can… Detect bugs Save money Improve
communication Prevent global warming Source: some company selling code review software
If you're going to use code review… …use it well
trunk feature Pull Request
John's Top Tips for Great Code Review Joy Treat with
a healthy dose of scepticism
Motivations
Expectations, Outcomes, and Challenges of Modern Code Review Alberto Bacchelli
& Christian Bird (2013) International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 712-721
"What are the motivations and expectations for modern code review?"
DEVELOPERS' MOTIVATIONS FINDING DEFECTS CODE IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER
0 100 200 300 400
John's Top Tip #1 Discuss the motivation as a team
CODE IMPROVEMENT UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL COMMUNICATION FINDING DEFECTS 0% 12.5% 25%
37.5% 50% Motivations Outcomes
John's Top Tip #2 Compare actual outcome with motivations
Creating a pull request
Think about the reviewer Do they know what I'm trying
to achieve? Are they aware of any constraints?
John's Top Tip #3 Write a description
In the description… Explain what the new feature is. Explain
why you made it. Suggest a path through the code.
John's Top Tip #4 Keep change size < 400 lines
Source: Cohen, Jason. (2006): The Best Kept Secrets of Peer Code Review.
Automated testing
John's Top Tip #5 Automatically run the test suite
John's Top Tip #6 Run linting tools (e.g., rubocop, hound)
Who should review?
To maximise defect detection, use 2 reviewers Source: Rigby, Peter
C, and Bird, Christian. (2013): Convergent Contemporary Software Peer Review Practices.
Who should review? Only the lead developer (Gatekeeper)
Who should review? Only senior developers (Gatekeepers, but more of
them)
Who should review? Developers at a similar level (True peer
review)
Who should review? Everyone
John's Top Tip #7 Get everyone involved in reviews (even
junior developers)
Reviewing code
Remember your motivation for reviewing
Valid comments (1) Problems with the code. i.e., actual defects
(not just things you don't like)
John's Top Tip #8 Explain the problem, don't criticise the
code
Valid comments (2) Questions about the code "I'm not sure
what this does"
S talkhub Talks Issues Pull requests Settings That isn't a
question? search This talk
Beware passive- aggressive questions Why did you use X here?
Why did you use X here - are you some kind of idiot?
Valid comments (2) Questions about the code "WWSMD?"
Valid comments (3) Improvements to the code "map would be
better than each"
John's Top Tip #9 Suggest improvements, don't dictate them
John's Top Tip #10 Justify your suggested improvements
Valid comments (4) Praise "this is nice! I'm going to
use this…"
Valid comments (5) Inconsistency with the rest of the codebase
Valid comments (6) Coding standard violations But only if there
is a standard to violate
John's Top Tip #11 Separate discussions on standards from code
review
Valid comments (7) There are no other valid comments. Code
review is not the place for this discussion.
Conversation is difficult via PR comments
John's Top Tip #13 Stop commenting. Talk.
John's Top Tip #14 Be yourself (unless you are a
monstrous pedant, in which case be someone better)
Example
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end This is dumb
Doesn't explain the problem Feels bad, man
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end Never use return
☹ Why not? I'm being told off
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end Return is unnecessary
Maybe I should change it Your face is unnecessary
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end This is equivalent
to omitting the `return` The return is unnecessary
☹ def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end The comparison
is wrong I did a wrong Why?
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end I think you
mean '> 0' Oops Go team!
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end This whole method
is pointless My work is pointless
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end What is the
point of this method? Why are they asking?
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end Why not ditch
this method and call `hash.values.any?` directly? …
def any_values?(hash) return hash.values.size >= 0 end <puts down pull
request, talks to developer?
The way you comment has a big impact
John's Top Tip #15 Avoid value judgements, even if they
about the code
Responding to comments
Try to address every comment
Try to create separate commits for each problem found
Tell the reviewer when you have addressed everything
Managing disagreement
John's Top Tip #16 If you disagree with any comments
talk about it
Don't reply with a new comment No good will come
from this
John's Top Tip #17 If you still disagree after talking,
ask someone else
Code review is inherently social Being "right" is not the
most important thing
Recap
Decide what you want from Code Review, as a team
1
Check that it actually delivers those benefits 2
Don't be shits to each other in pull requests 3
Thank you The Art of Code Review @jcinnamond LRUG 2016