Reviewing Code? Here Are Some Best Practices to Know

Reviewing code is one of the most critical aspects of development — but it is easier said than done! The goal of performing a code review is to enhance and optimize it. But it can prove to be a nightmare for reviewers and developers if not done correctly. Code review is the last line of defense before it is merged into an existing branch of code, and when faced with unknown procedures, lengthy wait times, and lack of buy-ins, the process can become inherently Sisyphean.

From our years of experience writing and reviewing code, we have compiled a list of the most common challenges that arise while reviewing code, and how you can avoid them all!

Common challenges with code review

Project Infrastructure: It is difficult for software developers to incorporate user feedback without a direct line of communication with those who will be using the software. Since all development initiatives require testing and pre-production, a similar issue arises when working on an unestablished project. When given a large, complicated project, it can be challenging to stay on top of everything and get the job done. In certain instances, you will be compelled to utilize code written by another member of the development team. This condition may pose difficulties for new developers.

Code reviews are highly subjective based on the reviewer: Frequently, developers conduct code reviews differently. They possess unique characteristics, techniques, and perspectives. Five distinct individuals can object to the same code for different reasons, while a sixth individual can approve it as-is. Obviously, this is not optimal.

It takes days, weeks, or months to evaluate evaluation requests: Potential reviewers are occasionally preoccupied and miss open patches because the distinction between a developer and a reviewer is frequently based on their relationship to a specific change proposal. Therefore, review requests may go unanswered for several weeks or months. It may result in bitrot, rendering the patch useless because the project has expanded beyond its original scope. This is a waste of time for everyone.

Code reviews develop into nitpicking sessions: There are many risks associated with this activity. It undermines the legitimacy of the code review process. Furthermore, it is frustrating for programmers because they must spend more time than they have writing code and fixing bugs. Additionally, the duration is considerably longer.

Suggested read: Building a low-maintenance software

Best practices when reviewing code

It is important to remember that peer reviews are not a competition but a forum for cooperation. Here are some of the best practices to follow when reviewing code:

Know what to search for in a code inspection

It is crucial to enter code reviews with knowledge of what to look for. Consider structural, stylistic, logical, performance, test protection, design, readability (and maintainability), and functional elements. Some aspects, such as structure and logic, can also be validated automatically (e.g., through static analysis). Design and functionality, however, must be evaluated by a human reviewer.

Build and test prior to code review

In the current era of Continuous Integration (CI), it is essential to build and test prior to performing a manual review. After passing these tests, you should conduct a review and deploy the code to the development code line. This contributes to stability. In addition, performing initial automatic checks will reduce errors and save time during the review process.

Never spend more than 60 minutes reviewing code

Avoid reviewing for more than an hour at a time. After that point, performance and attention to detail tend to decline. Frequent code reviews are strongly advised (and in short sessions). If you rest, your brain will have a chance to reset. Consequently, you can examine it with fresh eyes.

No more than 400 lines are to be reviewed at a time

If you attempt to evaluate too many lines of code simultaneously, you might be less likely to find bugs. Try to keep each code review session to 400 lines or less. Setting a limit on the number of lines of code (LOC) is essential for the same reasons that a time limit is essential. It ensures optimal performance during code review.

Give feedback that is useful (not hurt)

Try to provide constructive rather than negative feedback. You can accomplish this by asking questions rather than making assertions. Remember to complement your constructive comments with compliments. Giving feedback in person (or even conducting your evaluation in person) will improve your communication skills.

Conclusion

Code reviews are well worth the effort because they enable teams to collaborate and maintain a clean codebase, learn from one another and acquire new skills, and ensure that inventive solutions are applied to challenging issues. For code reviews to be viewed as beneficial by team members, executives must take the time to equip everyone with the necessary tools and knowledge.

As a software provider, Technogise’s experts are well-versed in writing and reviewing code. Reach out to us and see how we can help you with your next project.