> Proving correctness is not the point of a code review. > A code review ensures that [...] the implementation fits to the intent of the specification. I don'

> Proving correctness is not the point of a code review. > A code review ensures that [...] the implementation fits to the intent of the specification. I don't see how both of these can be true. > Functional correctness is typically "proven" by tests. You can (and, in my view, should) review tests, too.