I love reviewing code and I love having my code reviewed. In my current team we make significant improvements to the code during the review phase, both shaking

I love reviewing code and I love having my code reviewed. In my current team we make significant improvements to the code during the review phase, both shaking off bugs and making architectural improvements. That said, I think that there are some prerequisites for productive code review. Changes are preferably small, reviews need to happen in a timely fashion, the surface area for style nitpicking needs to be minimized with linting and formatting tools and the team needs to be pretty accepting when it comes to different minor design decisions that the different team members might make. If your change is 2000 lines for what could have been several atomic changes and you get 50 comments about indentation, "you should do it this [slightly different way that the reviewer would have preferred that doesn't significantly improve legibility or design]" after prodding the other team members for a week, address the comments and wait yet another week (and also manually rebase the patch because of 10 conflicts) it's no fun.