All Topics
All Topics
Technology
Technology
Design
Design
Programming
Programming
Science
Science
News
News
Gaming
Gaming
Entertainment
Entertainment
Business
Business
Finance
Finance
Sports
Sports
Health
Health
Food
Food
Travel
Travel
Art
Art
Music
Music
Books
Books
Education
Education
Politics
Politics
Personal
Personal
No algorithm. No AI slop. No ads. Just RSS. Pro-human. Indie writers. Real journalism. Open web. Chronological. Hand toasted.

Common Code Review Mistakes and Best Practices for Engineers

By

zdw

7mo ago· 12 min readenInsight

Summary

The article discusses common mistakes engineers make in code reviews, particularly in the era of AI-generated code. The author argues that focusing solely on code diffs is a major error, and emphasizes the importance of understanding the broader context, business requirements, and overall system architecture during code reviews. The piece provides practical advice for improving code review practices, highlighting how the rise of LLMs has changed the review process while the fundamental challenges remain.

Key quotes

· 4 pulled
In the last two years, code review has gotten much more important. Code is now easy to generate using LLMs, but it's still just as hard to review.
Many software engineers now spend as much (or more) time reviewing the output of their own AI tools than their colleagues' code.
The biggest mistake I see is doing a review that focuses solely on the diff.
I think a lot of engineers don't do code review correctly. Of course, there are lots of different ways to do code review, so this is largely a statement of my engineering taste.
Snippet from the RSS feed
In the last two years, code review has gotten much more important. Code is now easy to generate using LLMs, but it’s still just as hard to review1. Many software engineers now spend as much (or more) time reviewing the output of their own AI tools than th

You might also wanna read