Code review is the process in which developers critique each other’s work after it has been done, I used to groan every time people talked about code reviews. I mean why wouldn’t I? The tests had been set up, QA had approved them, and the product owners were happy. Code review was undoubtedly merely the process of looking for issues by definition.
Peer review on the other hand is designed to assess the validity, quality, and often the originality of the work. Its ultimate purpose is to maintain the integrity of the code by filtering out invalid or poor-quality code.
Peer review is one of the most effective tools for promoting best practices inside a product, a team, an organization, and beyond. Code review is beneficial because it promotes standards and standard awareness. Peer review, however, is even more effective.
What’s the problem with Code Review?
Code review often takes place after the coding is finished, after all the errors have been made and the time has been wasted. A final review is crucial but delaying the review process might lead a team to accept a poor solution for the sake of expediency. It might seem like twice as much work getting to the solution even when there is time to switch directions.
How is Peer review effective?
The Mindset Peer review helps your company develop a culture of high-quality software. Although I use the word “company,” I believe peer review’s scope might be considerably broader. It will benefit your project, your company, and the border community if you can persuade people to adopt a software quality attitude. The most crucial thing you can do for your team, in the long run, is to inspire people to adopt a pro-quality mentality.
Knowledge Sharing If management is careless, the developers will inevitably build knowledge silos. Over time, this system will be self-sustaining since each region will be the responsibility of only one developer, who will write code with its unique thoughts and design rather than reusing ideas from other parts of the system. As a result, collaboration becomes a myth, maintenance costs soar, and satisfaction plummets.
Peer review offers the perfect setting for knowledge exchange across silo barriers. Reviewing the work of developers who are experts in a field is an option for those who aren’t. Although this may not be ideal for finding bugs, peer review is also about talking and asking questions. Even if you can, do it at each other’s desks. The reviewer must have a clear understanding of how that portion of the system operates after finishing.
As a result, silos eventually fall apart, and we forget how they were created in the first place. Even when that one particular team member is away on vacation, the project may still move forward. When one region of the code is improved, other portions of the code start to follow.
Push devs to improve their skills Peer review shouldn’t be a one-way street where experts only critique rookies’ work. I see no problem with doing it the other way around. You have senior members on your team, so that they may mentor the less experienced members. With Peer reviews, junior developers get the chance to evaluate the work of experienced developers through peer review. They may talk about and comprehend the choices made by others while also learning more about a new aspect of development. It could even demonstrate to prospective team members those challenging ideas and raising concerns is acceptable.
Where does Peer review fit in?
Peer review should start before a single line of code is written. A developer should ask another developer about their strategy before beginning any code (this is in addition to consulting with non-technical members of the team). Early feedback gathering can prevent a lot of headaches in the future. Although several check-ins are welcomed, the final check becomes less thorough and more of a skim.
Should code review be replaced by Peer Review?
Hell no, you should continue doing code reviews as well. It helps maintain standardization and pushes everyone to follow good coding practices. Peer reviews by no means should not replace code reviews but instead should be an add-on.
Thanks for reading, if you have my articles feel free to subscribe to my newsletter or share the article.