Contact us anytime to know more — Abhishek P., Founder & CFO CISIN
Code review is a procedure for software quality assurance in which an automated code review tool or a team of analysts manually examine the program's source code. The only goals are to locate problems, fix mistakes, and, most of the time, enhance the quality of the code. By going over the codebase, one can ensure that all new features and software created by the company are of the highest caliber. We looked into the best methods for code review because it's a crucial procedure that all software companies need to follow.
Did You Know? Approximately 25% of the time developers spend doing maintenance tasks like debugging and refactoring—which take up more than 17 hours on average each week—is dedicated to repairing faulty code. That's an annual loss of production of around $300 billion.
Top 9 Practices For Reviewing Code
Now, let's delve into the code review best practices to ensure a successful and thorough examination of your code. Every team has a different code review procedure, and depending on the projects and participants, adjustments may need to be made. While examining your code, consider the nine points we've given below.
- Set Goals And Standards: It is essential to choose key indicators and establish clear objectives before implementing a code review process. Among the goals are appropriate coding standards for the business. Setting standards ensures that every software product the organization produces satisfies its criteria.
- Communicate Goals And Expectations: It's critical to communicate expectations and goals. If team members are not informed of expectations and objectives, there may be confusion about the outcome. It is simpler for a developer to finish a task when they know what is expected of them.
- Define A Code Review Process: It's time to establish a code review procedure now that everyone knows the objectives and expectations. A straightforward code review procedure will make it easier for everyone to stay on task and reduce time wasted on technical debt.
- Use A Code Review Checklist: A straightforward checklist is necessary for an effective code review. The reviewer can utilize this checklist to ensure that nothing is overlooked.
- Before the review, authors should annotate the source code: Throughout the software development cycle, annotation can be a helpful tool for both the reviewer and the developer. It facilitates the code reviewer's comprehension of the code and the functions of each code block. While adding annotations to code is encouraged, do not go overboard.
- Review For No More Than 60 Minutes At A Time: Working nonstop for extended periods might cause one's efficiency to decline. The idea remains the same while attempting to review code. Conducting code reviews for longer than sixty minutes is not advised. According to research, the reviewer's performance may decrease after 60 minutes, and some faults may go unreported.
- Establish A Process For Fixing Defects Found: The final goal is to fix the faults found after a code review process. Fixing the flaws will be ensured most efficiently with the least amount of technical debt if a specified methodology is in place.
- Foster A Positive Code Review Culture: Code reviews are a standard tool businesses use to assess a developer's performance. Code reviews, however, ought to be applied to more. It should be applied to create a learning atmosphere. It should be evident that they learn from their mistakes and take steps to prevent them from happening again instead of merely telling them what went wrong.
- Automate To Save Time: other automated code review tools are invaluable resources for any software organization. Code review times can be reduced to a few seconds using tools like these. In less than a minute, they may uncover flaws in the codebase and offer fixes.
Best Code Review Technique
While every organization conducts code reviews differently, we examine four of the most influential and widely used code review methods.
Instant Code Reviewing Technique
The Instant Code review method is the most straightforward way to review code. Here, the reviewer sits next to the developer, examining the code as it is written and making changes. This method, often called pair programming, works best for challenging applications since two minds can solve the issue more quickly and effectively.
Although this procedure appears advantageous to businesses, it is disadvantageous due to the time and labor required. There are fewer average lines per developer when two or more individuals collaborate on the code. Corrections also interrupt the code author's workflow. A reviewer presenting a solution or continuous help for a complex issue slows the developer's learning curve.
Ad-Hoc (Synchronous) Code Reviewing Technique
They are sometimes called the "Over the Shoulder" code review procedure. Ad hoc evaluations are the most widely used procedure; about 75% of businesses engage in them. The coder creates the code in this kind of synchronous approach, after which they ask the reviewer to check it. Reviewing the code while talking over the shoulder, the reviewer joins the coder at the screen. Since it is unplanned and impromptu, it is executed carefully. The procedure will be successful if the reviewer is available at that moment or if it interferes with the coder's pace.
This approach is likely to overlook mistakes and malfunctions since the reviewer frequently doesn't know the objective of the task. Immediate review produced more outstanding team results in refining sessions, with assignments discussed beforehand.
Usually, after an ad hoc review, only a developer knows the project's objective. The process's main issue is the forced context-switching. Imagine being called in for an ad hoc review by a junior member when working on complicated software. You must immediately get up from your workstation to check your coworker's code. Being forced to quit your job unexpectedly might lead to tiredness and annoyance.
Meeting-Based Code Reviewing Technique
With only 44% of respondents using it once a month, this is the least popular process. When a coder completes their work, a meeting is arranged for a meeting-based code review. The entire tech team comments on the code and works to improve it. It is a transitory procedure because it is doubtful to run continuously given the length of time, temporary loss of personnel, reduced efficiency, and difficulty assembling the entire team.
Code reviews conducted in meetings only make sense in situations when the team as a whole is unfamiliar with the procedure. It entails gathering the whole group in one room, exchanging ideas, and working through issues several times. This makes the process much more straightforward for each team member to grasp. This procedure is insufficient as a code quality assurance standard, as only slightly more than half of the organizations use it.
Tool-Based Code Reviewing Technique
At least not on the same screen; a team does not carry out this process. Another name for it is an asynchronous code review. Here, the coder releases the completed work for review by other programmers. The code reviewer will examine the code on their screen and make any necessary comments or corrections. They are then telling the programmer who will fix it on her schedule. When there are no modifications, the software is authorized, and the code is noted without any suggestions for improvement.
Direct dependencies, the main issue in the two procedures mentioned above, are eliminated via tool-based code review. It also removes the need for forced context switching as developers and reviewers work according to their schedules. However, the tool-based strategy has numerous review loops that take a lot of time, just as meeting-based methods, just like any other method, have drawbacks. After discussing these procedures, we've concluded that a speedier way is required to leverage Code Review while eliminating indirect dependency.
12 Powerful Code Review Tools
In this section, we review the best code review tools.
- Review Board: An open-source web-based code review tool supporting various version control systems with a graphical comparison of code changes.
- Crucible: The collaborative code review tool from Atlassian helps with issue spotting, plan modifications, and conversations across various version control systems.
- GitHub: Integrated into GitHub's pull requests, GitHub's code review tool offers a seamless and user-friendly experience for collaborative code evaluation.
- Axolo: Unconventional in its approach, Axolo focuses on communication by creating Slack channels for code reviews, ensuring efficient discussions.
- Collaborator: SmartBear's peer code and document review tool supporting multiple version control systems, integrating with popular project management tools.
- CodeScene: A behavioral code analysis tool going beyond static code analysis, offering cloud-based and on-premise solutions for in-depth insights.
- Visual Expert: Specializing in database code review, Visual Expert supports PowerBuilder, SQL Server, and Oracle PL/SQL, providing thorough performance analysis.
- Gerrit: A free and open-source web-based code review tool for Git repositories, combining bug tracking and code review functionalities.
- Rhodecode: Supporting Mercurial, Git, and Subversion, Rhodecode is a web-based tool offering conversational code reviews and a visual changelog.
- Veracode: Providing a suite of code review tools focused on security, Veracode offers static analysis and software composition analysis for vulnerability identification.
- Reviewable: Integrated with GitHub pull requests, Reviewable overcomes limitations, offering additional features for efficient code reviews.
- Peer Review for Trac: A free and open-source option for Subversion users, Peer Review Plugin for Trac integrates code reviews into the Trac open-source project, offering customized workflows.
Conclusion
Industry consensus remains decisive regarding code review's critical role in assuring code quality as we navigate its shifting terrain. Yet, with time and resource limitations mounting up, more companies have turned to automated Code Review technologies as a solution; such tools like CISIN have enhanced productivity and cost-cutting opportunities within the software engineering development process. Acceptance of such innovations promises millions-of-dollar increases in code quality while setting your development process for long-term success in this ever-evolving field of software engineering development.
Conclude your journey to code excellence with CISIN, a trailblazer in software product development service provider. For unparalleled guidance on code review trust our seasoned experts. In a landscape where automated code review technologies shine, CISIN stands out, enhancing productivity and cutting costs.
