On Saturday, 6 December 2014 at 15:14:23 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 08:46:58AM +0000, Paulo Pinto via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Saturday, 6 December 2014 at 08:26:23 UTC, Brad Roberts via
Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>On 12/5/2014 11:54 PM, Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>On Saturday, 6 December 2014 at 01:31:59 UTC, deadalnix
>>wrote:
>>>Code review my friend. Nothing gets in without review, and
>>>as won't
>>>usually don't enjoy the prospect of having to fix the shit
>>>of a
>>>coworker, one ensure that coworker wrote proper tests.
>>
>>Good luck making that work in companies.
>>
>>Code review is something for open source projects and agile
>>conferences.
>
>I've worked at several companies, both large and gigantic,
>and it's
>worked very well at all of them. Code reviews are an
>important part
>of healthy and quality code development processes.
Maybe I have worked at wrong companies then.
In 20 years of career I can count with one hand those that did
it, and
most developers hated it. Never lasted more than a few
meetings.
[...]
Huh, what...?? Meetings? For code review??? How does that even
work...?
Easy, the meetings get scheduled with each developer getting a
module for review.
Those developers then print the code and get some days for review
until the meeting.
The meeting takes place and afterwards each developer updates its
own module witb the gathered feedback.
The scenario you described I have only seen live in startups.
I never saw a corporate institution care about code review,
specially if the projects have offshored teams, as the ratio is
usually 10:1.
