Print

It’s Time for Your Review



David Rubinstein
Email
April 15, 2007 —  (Page 2 of 3)
One of them, Jason Cohen, founded a company called Smart Bear Software that—as you would expect—makes and sells a tool for peer code review. He took some time from distributing a book he wrote with his colleagues called “Best Kept Secrets of Peer Code Review” to talk about its benefits with me, regardless of tool.

Peer code review, he stated flatly, reduces the number of errors that get into code, and so is a savings all the way down the development line. In his book, he cites an example in which peer code review saves a company half of the cost of fixing the defects, and adds that 162 additional errors were found during the review.

Cohen asserts that one of the things holding back greater adoption of peer code review is that the formal processes laid out in works by such notables as Michael Fagan and Karl Wiegers involve seven-phase meetings with assigned roles to prevent defects from getting into code. The whole process of defect detection and correction simply takes too long when done in this way to be practical to many organizations, Cohen notes in his book. He acknowledges the meetings are successful in detecting defects, but says most organizations can’t afford to tie up their sharpest developers in lengthy meetings.

Formal review meetings also don’t align themselves well with iterative or agile development processes, Cohen said. “A formal meeting of four people for two hours, which is a proper Fagan inspection…that’s a day” in terms of man-hours, he said.

At the other end of the spectrum, there’s the over-the-shoulder, “Hey Bob, can you take a quick look at this?” technique. “Any review is better than no review,” Cohen said. The shortcomings of this method, though, are clear. You’re just not getting a lot of coverage, it’s not enforceable, and there are no metrics.

Other methods include what Cohen calls the e-mail pass-around process, which is difficult to follow when you start talking about errors in line 31, but line 31 is now line 17 because changes have been made to the code; and pair programming, as advocated in agile processes.




Pages 1 2 3 


Share this link: http://sdt.bz/30435
 

close
NEXT ARTICLE
Transactional analytics: A non-relativistic alternative to real time
We need a word that defines the time when you need data both delivered fast and to be as current as possible Read More...
 
 
 




News on Monday  more>>
Android Developer News  more>>
SharePoint Tech Report  more>>
Big Data TechReport  more>>

   
 
 

 


Download Current Issue
APRIL 2014 PDF ISSUE

Need Back Issues?
DOWNLOAD HERE

Want to subscribe?