3 ms·

The final tip being "use the tool I'm selling" makes the preceding 10 seem a lot less compelling. I'll stick to testing my code in prod, thanks.

nekgrim 13y ago
The 10 first tips can still be applied without the 11th. And a mail thread can replace their tool. Less efficient, but free. And still more efficient than testing in prod.
- masklinn 13y ago
  And the 11th tip is to use a code review tool, not to specifically use the example one (although the plug/mention is a bit heavy-handed)
yungchin 13y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive (sorry, I just think this article deserves a more kind top comment than this one)
raverbashing 13y ago
Anything that's from "Rational Systems" is an overpriced unusable piece of crap and I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole
- masklinn 13y ago
  Not disagreeing, but the tool mentioned is not from Rational, it only integrates with the Rational workflow tool.
  - lifebeyondfife 13y ago
    I've used CodeCollaborator (the SmartBear software plugged at the end of the post) and found it to be a good tool for doing multi-site code reviews. It's straightforward to use; web based; the default diff tool is reasonable; you can specify suggestions or bugs i.e. "I think you should change this line" versus "This line needs to be changed". IBM stuff, however... well, I've mentioned my feelings on their software on HN before. They're still selling Lotus Notes and Clearcase - I'd be very careful before taking anything they've built/bought.
padenot 13y ago
There are a bunch of open source software to do what exactly what they advocate, that is "a tool-assisted lightweight code review". At Mozilla, we use GitHub (for project hosted on github, such as Gaia), and splinter [1], that integrates with bugzilla. I know there is an ongoing effort to switch to reviewboard [2] at the moment, as we feel our review tool should do more that what splinter is capable of doing. [1]: http://blog.fishsoup.net/2009/09/23/splinter-patch-review/ http://blog.fishsoup.net/2009/09/23/splinter-patch-review/ [2]: www.reviewboard.org

nekgrim 13y ago

The 10 first tips can still be applied without the 11th. And a mail thread can replace their tool. Less efficient, but free. And still more efficient than testing in prod.

masklinn 13y ago
And the 11th tip is to use a code review tool, not to specifically use the example one (although the plug/mention is a bit heavy-handed)

yungchin 13y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_motive (sorry, I just think this article deserves a more kind top comment than this one)

raverbashing 13y ago

Anything that's from "Rational Systems" is an overpriced unusable piece of crap and I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole

masklinn 13y ago
Not disagreeing, but the tool mentioned is not from Rational, it only integrates with the Rational workflow tool.
- lifebeyondfife 13y ago
  I've used CodeCollaborator (the SmartBear software plugged at the end of the post) and found it to be a good tool for doing multi-site code reviews. It's straightforward to use; web based; the default diff tool is reasonable; you can specify suggestions or bugs i.e. "I think you should change this line" versus "This line needs to be changed". IBM stuff, however... well, I've mentioned my feelings on their software on HN before. They're still selling Lotus Notes and Clearcase - I'd be very careful before taking anything they've built/bought.

padenot 13y ago

There are a bunch of open source software to do what exactly what they advocate, that is "a tool-assisted lightweight code review". At Mozilla, we use GitHub (for project hosted on github, such as Gaia), and splinter [1], that integrates with bugzilla. I know there is an ongoing effort to switch to reviewboard [2] at the moment, as we feel our review tool should do more that what splinter is capable of doing. [1]: http://blog.fishsoup.net/2009/09/23/splinter-patch-review/ http://blog.fishsoup.net/2009/09/23/splinter-patch-review/ [2]: www.reviewboard.org