I agree with you, a code review isn't meant to get the best code ever, mostly because as you said, there's no universal correct way, but it's meant to make sure

I agree with you, a code review isn't meant to get the best code ever, mostly because as you said, there's no universal correct way, but it's meant to make sure the code change is doing what it's means to be doing. What is not clear in your comment though is that that means looking at the code and making sure there's no mistake too in it too. It may seems like it's working as expected, but maybe you'll find an edge case that was missed by the original developer. It's possible too that the solution of the original developer was clear to him, or that it's clear knowing the context of the ticket, but once in the wild, that code may become incomprehensible (which later on can bring more error because someone misunderstood why that line was there and changed it incorrectly for example). That can be easily fixed by adding a tiny comment there. Sure doing what it's supposed to do in an acceptable performance is great, but I think there's a bit more into a code review and ignoring theses can be quite problematic. > "I can't read it!" - I also can't read Chinese Doesn't this show there's an issue though in the long term? If you are the only one that can read Chinese in the company, maybe it would be a better idea to consider using English?