Essential Tips for Effective Code Reviews in Team Development
Written on
Chapter 1: Key Considerations for Code Reviews
This year, while collaborating on an application with a sizable team, I reflected on the essential aspects to keep in mind during code reviews. A primary concern is ensuring that reviewers do not waste their precious time. It’s crucial to be aware of their busy schedules as both you and your reviewers will be managing your time effectively during the review process. This advice is particularly useful for those engaged in collaborative development rather than working solo.
Section 1.1: The Importance of Self-Review
Before submitting a Pull Request (PR) and designating reviewers, I always perform a self-review. The goal of this practice is to minimize the workload for reviewers. In a team setting, everyone is preoccupied with their responsibilities, so by addressing my own errors beforehand, I allow reviewers to concentrate on more significant aspects of the code.
Through self-review, I often uncover various insights, such as discovering better ways to write code or identifying discrepancies with specifications. This proactive approach ensures that when I finally submit my PR, I am prepared to assign reviewers. I typically maintain a checklist of self-review items in Notion and go through them after completing my implementation but prior to submitting the PR. For instance, I verify that all test cases are adequately covered and double-check that the implementation aligns with the specifications.
Section 1.2: Comprehending the Implementation
One common pitfall I’ve encountered (and still do occasionally) is merely copying and pasting existing implementations as references. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with building upon previous work, it’s vital to grasp the intention behind the original implementation. Without this understanding, the outcome may be flawed.
If your code is under review and you can’t articulate why you implemented it the way you did, it creates an awkward situation. To avoid this, I ensure that I comprehend the rationale behind existing implementations before integrating them into my work. When submitting a review, I also include comments indicating which implementations I referenced, explaining my reasoning for using them.
Chapter 2: Crafting Comprehensive PR Comments
When creating a PR, I strive to provide detailed descriptions that encompass the context of the changes, relevant links, and the background of my decisions. This practice was inspired by observing a senior engineer’s thorough PR, which motivated me to adopt a similar approach.
I aim to cover the following six points in my PR comments:
- Overview
- Specific measures taken
- Implementation background
- Related links
- Supplementary information (e.g., UI changes)
- Screenshots of the UI, where applicable
By detailing these elements, reviewers can quickly understand the nature of the changes and the motivations behind them, ultimately expediting the review process.
Section 2.1: Utilizing Emojis Effectively
While optional, I frequently incorporate emojis into my comments. They add a cheerful tone that can make communication feel more engaging. For example, I use the question mark emoji when I have inquiries or the thumbs-up emoji upon receiving PR approval.
In conclusion, I hope this discussion about maintaining awareness during reviews proves beneficial. It’s essential to respect both my time and the reviewers’ time throughout the PR process.
Stackademic
Thank you for reading through this guide! If you found it helpful, please consider showing your support by clapping and following the author. Don't forget to follow us on Twitter (X), LinkedIn, and YouTube. Visit Stackademic.com to learn more about our mission to democratize programming education globally.
The first video, "Code Review Best Practices," provides insights into how to conduct effective code reviews that enhance team productivity and collaboration.
The second video, "How To REALLY Do Code Reviews," delves into practical tips for executing successful code reviews that lead to improved code quality and team dynamics.