Wie können Sie Code-Reviews beschleunigen, ohne auf Gründlichkeit zu verzichten?

"Effective code reviews start with clear expectations. Define purpose, scope, and standards. Communicate with the developer, set goals, use checklists, establish timelines, and maintain a consistent feedback format for a constructive review process."

From my experience, the following things can help to speed up code reviews: - collaborative / pairing first culture, in this way, you're kind of actually reviewing the code in real time - established standards with code syntax and formatting, for example if you have a linter in place, it can remove the need for minor suggestions/comments - automation for CI/CD, for example, having a github action or jenkins job run tests when a PR is open helps greatly and can avoid asking if the reviewer wrote or updated tests

Set Clear expectations, Define Standards, and communicate the same with the entire team. Define the process in KB. Automate the process of validating the standard and process.

Static code analysis tools and automated tests can take a big chunk of the burden out of the developers hands. With this in place, the focus of code reviews should be on ensuring readability, maintainability and coding standards.

Encourage developers to self-review their code before submitting it for review. Utilize automated tools for code formatting, linting, and basic quality checks to ensure that the code adheres to the project’s standards and best practices.

First, set clear rules for writing code. This helps reviewers spot mistakes faster. Second, use special tools to find common mistakes automatically. This lets reviewers concentrate on the tricky parts. Lastly, split big changes into smaller parts. This makes it easier to check everything carefully.

"Prioritize essentials in code reviews: functionality, performance, security, readability. Use automation for syntax and style. Focus on impactful feedback, avoiding nitpicking or personal preferences for an efficient review process."

Some good areas to consider: - Is the code readable? Is its function clear to future maintainers who will come across it? - Are functions and variables named consistently with the rest of the code base? - Have edge cases been considered? - Is the performance and complexity reasonable for the use case?

Code review is a great opportunity for both parties to grow together on new and better ways of doing things, in addition a good clear, concrete and documented feedback gives the opportunity to others developers to learn and understand why it was done in this way and not another.

"In code reviews, foster collaboration and learning. Be constructive and respectful, avoiding competition or harsh criticism. Explain suggestions with reasons and examples, acknowledge strengths, and appreciate the developer's efforts for a positive and productive review experience."

Code reviews work best as a collaborative process. They will be a mix of suggestions, concerns, and more open-ended conversations to build understanding and consensus. As you grow as a developer, they will be an important piece of your mentoring of more junior developers, so the tone of your comments should reflect that.

Understanding the temperament and preferences of the developer whose code you're reviewing is crucial. Tailoring your feedback to match the individual’s communication style can prevent defensiveness and encourage a more open, productive dialogue. For colleagues who may have a strong sense of ownership over their code, framing suggestions in a way that acknowledges their effort while gently proposing improvements can be effective. Conversely, with those you share a strong rapport with, a straightforward critique may be well-received.

"Code reviews offer a chance for mutual learning. Seek feedback on your review process, embrace improvement opportunities, and stay updated on web development trends. Engage in peer reviews to learn from diverse perspectives and experiences, fostering continuous growth as a reviewer."

In one word. Copilot. Engineering teams should be using AI to review your code. No matter your experience or background. AI powered by Large Language Models are absolutely shifting the way we'll be coding (and reviewing code) in the future.

View code reviews as a two-way learning street; seek feedback from developers and other reviewers. Use feedback to enhance your reviewing skills and adapt your style. Stay updated on the latest trends, tools, and techniques in web development and code review.

Code reviews are also a great way to get a peek into the code-base of a project you're less familiar with, such as a notable open-source project or a system or tool that your application may interact with at your current organization (when appropriate). It's a good way to get visibility and grow as a developer.

Enhance efficiency in code reviews by automating tasks. Utilize integrated code review platforms for seamless collaboration. Employ code quality tools to analyze metrics like complexity, duplication, and security, streamlining the review process for faster and more effective outcomes.

Use of linters / static code analysis tools can help in spotting possible errors or mistakes. Having tests and coverage tools might also help assessing code quality. Test mutation tools can be also used to assess test quality. All of this can run automatically before the review. These tools' results can help the reviewer focus on the important aspects while having a general outlook of potential code issues.

Implement continuous integration (CI) systems that automatically run tests and report on code coverage, potential bugs, and security vulnerabilities. Automation can handle repetitive tasks, allowing reviewers to focus on more critical aspects of the code.

Integration of linting tools like sonar lint etc make sure that the code passes the basic sanity and all the due diligence are taken care of at the time of review.

Encourage small, manageable pull requests or merge requests. Smaller changes are easier and faster to review thoroughly than large, complex submissions. This approach also helps in catching issues early and reduces the cognitive load on the reviewer.

Make small, concise commits. Tell why you made the change in the commit message or pull request. Elaborate only when required.

Firstly, reviewing smaller and more frequent code changes allows for the early detection and resolution of issues. By addressing problems at their source, teams can prevent the accumulation of technical debt, leading to a more maintainable and robust codebase. This proactive approach minimizes the likelihood of encountering major roadblocks later in the development lifecycle.

We should also apply checks at the time of coding itself. Tools like linters, spell check and sonar quality gates can catch basic code quality issues and custom configs for linters can be setup to have all developers code in a similar style. This helps keep code consistent and makes manual review easier. Manual review can be further simplified by having developers write automated unit tests which gives the reviewer lot of insights on why a specific function is written. Hence developer time in code review and feedback is reduced and they can concentrate on their coding and only have code review sessions for complex modules where reviewer still needs some more clarifications.

Instituting regular, structured team review sessions—either weekly or bi-weekly—where complex code submissions are examined in a panel-like setting can be highly beneficial. This format fosters a dynamic environment for Q&A, allowing team members to dive deep into problem-solving techniques, coding standards, and innovative solutions. Such sessions not only expedite the review process by pooling collective insights but also serve as a valuable educational forum.

speed with accuracy is an ongoing process. 1- Educate team on the importance / benefits of code review. 2- Set a guideline , -Each story should have a code review subtask assigned to a reviewer -The reviewer is accountable for the code going to production (give him the credit) -The developer is responsible for the code -Review should happen with the developer, and no blame, it should be comments with feedback to improve 3-Make the check list adhering to ur organization standard and adding ur product specific also. 4-Integrate automation tools for code/ security scan 5 - collect the metrics and have a discussion with the developer to seek/ provide feedback on improving next time

I think that enforcing coding standards can significantly streamline the code review process. Tools like EditorConfig or StyleCop in Visual Studio can be quite helpful in achieving this. Analyzers can detect code issues immediately, even before submitting a pull request for code review.

Encourage developers to self-review their code before submitting it for review, catching any obvious issues beforehand. Utilize a checklist template for code reviews, covering common issues and best practices that need to be checked for each review. Train reviewers to focus on the most important aspects of the code, such as security, performance, and maintainability, rather than getting bogged down in minor details. Implement a peer review system where multiple developers review the code, allowing for more comprehensive coverage in a shorter amount of time. Conduct regular meetings or stand-ups to discuss code reviews and any recurring issues, helping to streamline the process and prevent redundancies.