4 ms·

Yes. At Tingo.com, my team of 11 does not do code reviews. Our code base is big but not huge: 151k lines of Java and 125k lines of JS (not a great measure, but

Yes. At Tingo.com, my team of 11 does not do code reviews. Our code base is big but not huge: 151k lines of Java and 125k lines of JS (not a great measure, but it gives some idea of magnitude). We do extensive testing and static analysis. We ship code everyday, and have been doing that for the last 10 months. We end up having to patch production to fix bugs pretty infrequently-- less then once a month.

stevoski 14y ago
While helpful, this is not as good as quantitative evidence. Can you point to research that shows code reviews are not helpful? Or an "anti-pattern"?
- ecopoesis 14y ago
  No, but neither is there quantitative evidence that code reviews help improve software quality. Code reviews are just always assumed to be good-- they're a basic part of the 'good software engineering' cargo cult. I got rid of them here because I've personally never seen a beneficial affect at any of the places I've worked. Easy to spot bugs still made it to production. Crappy, inelegant code still made it to trunk. Getting rid of code reviews and making developers personally responsible for what they commit has improved both of those aspects for us.
  - philwelch 14y ago
    > No, but neither is there quantitative evidence that code reviews help improve software quality. You might want to check out the book "Code Complete", which says in Chapter 24: "...the average defect detection rate is only 25 percent for unit testing, 35 percent for function testing, and 45 percent for integration testing. In contrast, the average effectiveness of design and code inspections are 55 and 60 percent."
  - stevoski 14y ago
    There is indeed quantitative evidence that code reviews help improve software quality. Steve McConnell's "Code Complete" refers in detail to such evidence.
philwelch 14y ago
There's a big, big gap between "Code reviews are an antipattern and should die in a fire. They slow down the development process without bringing any benefits." and "My startup does extensive testing and static analysis but no code reviews; we don't have very many bugs in production". I think you would have come across better saying something like this from the outset, and with a lot less attitude.
Fishkins 14y ago
You've provided one uncontrolled anecdote that condradicts all the object research I've seen [1]. I don't find that very convincing. Not only does code review identify bugs, it does so much more effectively than any other method tested. [1] http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/01/code-reviews-just-do-it.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/01/code-reviews-just-d...
lwat 14y ago
One personal anecdote? And you didn't even try code reviews? I see.

stevoski 14y ago

While helpful, this is not as good as quantitative evidence. Can you point to research that shows code reviews are not helpful? Or an "anti-pattern"?

ecopoesis 14y ago
No, but neither is there quantitative evidence that code reviews help improve software quality. Code reviews are just always assumed to be good-- they're a basic part of the 'good software engineering' cargo cult. I got rid of them here because I've personally never seen a beneficial affect at any of the places I've worked. Easy to spot bugs still made it to production. Crappy, inelegant code still made it to trunk. Getting rid of code reviews and making developers personally responsible for what they commit has improved both of those aspects for us.
- philwelch 14y ago
  > No, but neither is there quantitative evidence that code reviews help improve software quality. You might want to check out the book "Code Complete", which says in Chapter 24: "...the average defect detection rate is only 25 percent for unit testing, 35 percent for function testing, and 45 percent for integration testing. In contrast, the average effectiveness of design and code inspections are 55 and 60 percent."
- stevoski 14y ago
  There is indeed quantitative evidence that code reviews help improve software quality. Steve McConnell's "Code Complete" refers in detail to such evidence.

philwelch 14y ago

There's a big, big gap between "Code reviews are an antipattern and should die in a fire. They slow down the development process without bringing any benefits." and "My startup does extensive testing and static analysis but no code reviews; we don't have very many bugs in production". I think you would have come across better saying something like this from the outset, and with a lot less attitude.

Fishkins 14y ago

You've provided one uncontrolled anecdote that condradicts all the object research I've seen [1]. I don't find that very convincing. Not only does code review identify bugs, it does so much more effectively than any other method tested. [1] http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/01/code-reviews-just-do-it.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2006/01/code-reviews-just-d...

lwat 14y ago

One personal anecdote? And you didn't even try code reviews? I see.