Impressions of code Reviews (recall)

Impressions of code Reviews (recall)

Recall before the Money boss Open code review process of the seminar, something did not go, some regret, so talk about the current most fashion topic, share the experience before the code and other reviews.

Before the CFT research and development atmosphere is still more emphasis on code review, the completion is also relatively good, for the following reasons:

1. Business features. We are business with money, so a problem, the loss is money, so the responsibility is very strict, the punishment is very heavy, and the penalty money generally punished eldest brother, so the quality of the norms easily from the top down to promote, less. Of course, there are problems on the line, often let QA (quality management) chasing the reasons and requirements to come up with improvement measures, as a creep is also very annoying very afraid of wood has ~
2. Rigorous process. All the requirements are to take the demand system, through the workflow electronic flow step-by-step, test manager, testing, development leader, operation and maintenance leader have an approval however, will not go to the launch. The test requires development to provide code review results, test managers require use case review, research and development leader to provide risk reporting, and determine whether to open a security review, these three reviews are more or less related to the code review, here by the way.

(1) Development in the code before the submission of code review, there are a few pushed to the test and then proceed, which is very irritable for testing, because the measurement of the half you told me to update the changes after the review, why did you go?

The review form is basically the offline booking conference room for a half-day, rarely online review, by the leader-level lead, related project developers on their own code and logic to explain, and then summarize the change point output meeting minutes.

The main evaluation of the review of the implementation of the problem-oriented approach, very little involved in coding specifications and code structure of the problem (generally not the new words in this respect everyone will abide by), focusing on but not limited to timeouts, locks, system calls, exception handling, data dictionary design and other aspects of the problem.

Will the test take part in the code review? Generally invited to participate in the test, but the effect is not very good, the main reasons are three:

• Did not leave too much early intervention time for the test. The previous system is a large system under a number of sub-systems, a subsystem of the characteristics of the test, then who idle on who to test, respected is the tester's business full mastery, like most of my time measuring background services, sometimes also be pulled to test the client, or support other projects, So the test is invited to participate in the review when the basic is busy with other projects, there is no reservation of early intervention time, so often will confused.
• The code capabilities of the test are not level-aligned. Before the department is very important code, in the submission of test reports to use tool output code comparison, meaning: testers to know what the development has changed, what impact, the test personnel to the code of the level of inspection slowly went up, there was a leak test, the leader also pulled me together to see the code, asked why I did not see it. But there are some colleagues with weak code ability, to participate in code review is more difficult. Of course, the ability to code does not determine the level of testing, this cannot be forced.
• Sometimes it is only after testing that the process and the system have a deeper thought. Sometimes measured to find that there is a place unreasonable or shaken before the design, always sigh in the test before the discovery is good, but before the test is not so deep practice and thinking, so in the test case review for the development of the implementation of the logic of some challenges

(2) Use case review is also the way under the line through the review meeting, mainly in the test round after the convening (this time point I think is good, the test has a deeper understanding of the system). Invite project development, project testers, other senior testers to participate. Mainly by the project tester to explain the system implementation and corresponding test cases

The scope of the review is broader than the general development review use case, for system design or code implementation problems, can be mentioned; if there is a problem with the development logic or a test case design problem, will immediately pull out the code together to confirm, such as a test case for a fee parameter length of more than 32 error, Challenged: Why is 32-bit, through development and code validation is because the value type of the fee field used int, evaluated after the int is too short, must use a long, so the development and testing are to be revised, and by the development review use cases generally see this does conform to the code logic often let go. Therefore, in the general review results, the test case and the development of code will have to optimize the place.

(3) Safety review. The project needs to issue a risk report; high-risk projects need to look for a safety interface person to review (team leader or deputy Director level), talk about the risk points involved, the solution of the idea and the implementation of the Code. Often because of the need to solve the new security risks proposed by the boss delay on the line there are wood, said more are tears.
A part of a risk report, such as this

The benefits of a personal Sense code review are as follows:

1. for development. Many projects will be divided into modules to many people, and then we developed separately or with the code before the development mode of the development model, the interaction between the modules may be fragmented, modular code style, quality varies. Through the review, let development to each other's modules have a certain understanding, and for their own insufficient code first optimization, improve code quality. In addition, there are new project teams, through the review of senior people, can also help newcomers to the project faster, improve the level.
2. For testing. Participating in code review can understand system features, need to focus on functional points, and sometimes ask how to develop this place to test or require development to a tool or a switch, to help test case design and subsequent testing, of course, the most important: do not let the garbage code waste my time. Of course, the review can be discussed under the line, do not understand can also ask questions, than the online review interesting ~ ~

Of course, the drawback is time-consuming ~ ~ If the code review is carried out but not seriously, it is time-consuming. So in the CFT, the jury will be very serious, but I do not know that everyone is really aware of the benefits of code review or is bound by the process. Until later, several development groups in the CFT also went to the WXG, because the new department did not enforce the code review process, the result everyone began not to do code review ... This shows that using the process to force easy, but let quality awareness, difficult AH ~ ~ ~ ~ So, I have always wanted to introduce code review in the project, however, this is not used without Gerrit problem, but how to let the development willingly accept the code review, in what way to achieve it and produce due effect of the problem.

PS: Today development looked under another development code: How to write so bad, if QA push code review, I fully support. --It feels like the world will be saved.

Impressions of code Reviews (recall)