Code reviews can be highly beneficial but tricky to execute well due to the human factors involved, says Adrienne Braganza Tacke, author of *Looks Good to Me: Actionable Advice for Constructive Code Review.* In a recent conversation with *The New Stack*, Tacke identified three challenges teams must address for successful code reviews: ambiguity, subjectivity, and ego.
Code reviews can be highly beneficial but tricky to execute well due to the human factors involved, says Adrienne Braganza Tacke, author of *Looks Good to Me: Actionable Advice for Constructive Code Review.* In a recent conversation with *The New Stack*, Tacke identified three challenges teams must address for successful code reviews: ambiguity, subjectivity, and ego.
Ambiguity arises when the goals or expectations for the code are unclear, leading to miscommunication and rework. Tacke emphasizes the need for clarity and explicit communication throughout the review process. Subjectivity, the second challenge, can derail reviews when personal preferences overshadow objective evaluation. Reviewers should justify their suggestions based on technical merit rather than opinion. Finally, ego can get in the way, with developers feeling attached to their code. Both reviewers and submitters must check their egos to foster a constructive dialogue.
Tacke encourages programmers to first review their own work, as self-checks can enhance the quality of the code before it reaches the reviewer. Ultimately, code reviews can improve code quality, mentor developers, and strengthen team knowledge.
Learn more from The New Stack about code reviews:
The Anatomy of Slow Code Reviews
One Company Rethinks Diff to Cut Code Review Times
How Good Is Your Code Review Process?
Join our community of newsletter subscribers to stay on top of the news and at the top of your game.