The Evolution of Code Review: Pros and Cons of Code Review Methods [Infographic]
The Evolution of Code Review: Pros and Cons of Code Review Methods [Infographic]
In this infographic, we’ll take a closer look at the different types of peer reviews and the benefits, as well as downfalls, of each.
Join the DZone community and get the full member experience.
Join For FreeBuilt by operators for operators, the Sensu monitoring event pipeline empowers businesses to automate their monitoring workflows and gain deep visibility into their multi-cloud environments. Get started for free today.
So much has changed in the peer code review space through the years. Here at SmartBear, we’ve seen it all.
We remember the days of meeting room reviews, based on Fagan methodologies. We’ve seen these evolve into reviews being done “over the shoulder,” as well as reviews being done through email. We also started the movement to tool-based peer code review when we first introduced our code review platform, Collaborator.
Though we love tool-based code reviews, we’ve also seen that these other forms of code review are still the go-to method for a number of organizations. In fact, when we surveyed more than 600 software developers, testers, and IT professionals earlier this year, we found that:
- 72% of teams are doing ad-hoc, or “over-the-shoulder” code review
- 63% are doing tool-based code review
- 53% are doing meeting-based code review
No matter what form of code review your team is involved in, it’s important that your team is regularly doing code reviews. In the below infographic, we’ll take a closer look at the different types of peer reviews and the benefits, as well as downfalls, of each. Find out which code review method is right for your team.
Download our guide to mitigating alert fatigue, with real-world tips on automating remediation and triage from an IT veteran.
Like This Article? Read More From DZone
Published at DZone with permission of Justin Collier , DZone MVB. See the original article here.
Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.
{{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}
{{ parent.tldr }}
{{ parent.linkDescription }}
{{ parent.urlSource.name }}