The developers can avoid the painful process of code reviewing and can enhance their experience by following the best practices. Well, the process involves the methodical examination of computer sources planned to find and fix mistakes that may remain unnoticed in the early development stages. Code Review usually finds and eliminates common errors such as format string exploits, race conditions, memory leaks, and buffer overflows, which eventually improve the security of the software. Following the best practices in code reviewing software diminishes the responsibilities of reviewing a great lump of code on the developer by organizing the inspection of source code for identified vulnerabilities.

A code review will identify if the software is prone to unique attacks including SQL injection, Cross-site Scripting (XSS), and Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF). The code review can even perceive an unsuitable error handling, which could leak beneficial technical information to an attacker. It will additionally see if there are any touchy files that can be internet-on-hand and can be downloaded by means of attackers.

Typically, code reviews are divided into major categories such as formal code review, and the other one is lightweight code review. For instance, Fagan inspection entails a cautious and comprehensive procedure with different stages. This is referred to as the older and traditional technique for code reviewing that occurs in a sequence of meetings and reviews codes through each line. This is the kind of formal inspection that is tremendously systematic and efficient. In fact, it is believed to be one of the successful practices to find faults in codes under review.

On the contrary, lightweight code reviews usually require less overhead instead of formal code inspections. This is performed as an element of ordinary development procedures such as email pass-around, pair programming, and tool-assisted code review. 

This kind of code review needs much less visual projection than formal code inspections. If finished correctly it could be additionally beneficial. Lightweight code reviews are regularly finished as a part of the same software development method and attempt to progress the price income thing so long as code first-class is ideal with no longer incurring costs of the visible projection of conventional meetings-based inspections.

Code review methodologies are available in diverse sizes and styles and every organization that writes code for a living tends to have its very own custom procedure, however, there are a few commonplace factors to most assessment tactics. The effective approach is very common that includes preparation, assessment, and follow-ups. A well-prepared review process will need to encompass the below essential elements.

What to look for in a code review

It is important to look for the essential things in a code review such as structure, style, logic, performance, test coverage, design, readability, and functionality. It is recommended to create some sort of checklist to highlight the things code reviews tend to focus on. This is considered the easiest step to implement as it should follow the outline set by the coding standards. Make sure to focus on the areas you tend to struggle with, as it will make the entire process a lot easier.

Maintain coding standards

It’s essential that you play your part in supporting maintenance coding requirements. Look to feature the coding standards, particularly for aspects that aren’t already in there. One of the most essential challenges for any developer whilst organizing combative code review is understanding or knowing wherein the following problem will come from. In case you contain newly located problems in your coding standard checklist, it’ll be ready to be used the following time you come back up in opposition to a code assessment. It is essential to constantly gain knowledge during the code evaluation method, the use of your tick list will assist fix the idea that makes you less likely to miss opportunities to apply and put in force feedback. 

Review fewer lines of code at the time

Plenty of programmers could argue pretty aggressively that evaluations are way too time-consuming, but it is well-noted that the drawbacks nearly usually outweigh the merits obtained from well-prepared peer evaluations. The benefits are many and they include fewer bugs, less remodelling, and all-around better interaction with the team. 

According to a recent study by Cisco Systems Programming, it has been revealed that developers should not review more than 200 lines of code at a time. Beyond this limit, the human brain loses its tendency to find errors effectively.

This makes sense not to review quickly and for too long in just one sitting. It is a proven fact that code reviews when done in a reasonable quantity lead to precision code review. This is because when we engage ourselves in a single activity over a period of time, performance usually begins dropping off after the saturation level. 

Taking breaks from any task over a period of time leads to improved quality of work. 

Set fixed goals and capture metrics

Before beginning with the code reviewing process, it makes sense to decide how you are going to measure the effectiveness of peer review after discussing a few tangible goals with your team. 

Unique tools can be used in all parts of assessment like gathering files, spreading and presenting files, explaining, gathering metrics, and controlling code overview process workflows. The primary hassle of the gear help overview is the fee of purchasing a business presentation or the improvement fee associated with growing an in-house tool.

Using a metrics-driven code will help access data automatically so that your sensitive information remains accurate and without human bias. It is also beneficial to consider internal process metrics including defect rate, defect density, and inspection rate. Implementing either strictly controlled or automated processes can help provide repeatable metrics.

Create a process for fixing errors

Even the best code review technique can come across challenges. The maximum not unusual ones will encompass time, practice, and initial frustration, and they want to show dedication. Peer evaluations are known for the sizeable amount of time they take. Like some other assemblies, a sturdy recognition of the topic, being acquainted with the procedure, and setting up strong regulations and concepts can assist in preserving the time right down to a reasonable level. 

Dealing with team participants who are not familiar with the code review method can be an exceptionally frustrating detail. An evaluation group wants to plan a structure that suits all and only deviates from it in exceptional situations. Do that and over the years all members will come custom to the system and the evaluation will run easily.

Once you create a checklist, limit LOC at a time, and name key metrics, there is still an important step missing. This is the process to fix the bugs. This may sound like an obvious and clear process, however, developers usually fail to have a systematic method for fixing the bugs.

The most effective way to fix the bugs is through using a collaborative code review tool that allows logging bugs and making required changes in the code. Without implementing an automated tool, it becomes difficult to log in to the team’s usual error tracking system as they are found before code is released to QA.


Code reviews are such practices that software professionals do all of the time, however, how do ensure they are simply useful? What do you need to acquire by means of carrying out a code evaluation? Find bugs? See if anyone else agrees with your coding requirements. The most important parts of a code assessment are to validate the design and discover Bugs.

Code review for any developer may be an exhausting process but following the above simple practices will boost the capability you have to get through the procedure correctly and quickly.