4 ms·

Thorough code review is why we as an industry stopped shipping bugs.

• groby_b 3y ago
  We, as an industry, didn't stop shipping bugs. (Small example: https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/releases https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/releases) And that thorough code review prevents bugs is, at best, a debatable assertion. See e.g. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/code-reviews-do-not-find-bugs-how-the-current-code-review-best-practice-slows-us-down/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/code-re... It finds _some_ bugs. CI/CD, and a massive investment in automated testing has probably had the largest impact in moving software quality forward. (See e.g. "Accelerate", Forsgren, Humble & Kim) Code review is an excellent tool to socialize knowledge and train up more junior engineers, but in terms of preventing bugs, it's low-value.
  • aradox66 3y ago
    The parent comment is sarcastic
    • groby_b 3y ago
      Maybe. I can't read OPs mind, and it's a common enough trope throughout the industry that I figured adding some evidence could be useful.
    • biesnecker 3y ago
      Sorry I thought that was too obvious to warrant an /s but I suppose not.
  • chaxor 3y ago
    I'm fairly certain we ship far more bugs now than we ever did. Before we had the ability to just add a patch and let the user download it, the end result needed to be very solid, because once that disk was purchased and taken home, it was static. Now less attention is paid to these things, because it's just assumed to be tomorrow's problem.