|The stupid question is the question not asked|
Formal code review specifications and reporting formatby Nuke (Scribe)
|on May 16, 2002 at 03:26 UTC||Need Help??|
I'm a little nervous about writing this, as it's my first node, and I wasn't sure if it should go in Seekers or Q&A. I hope I chose wisely.
I guess it all started when grep posted something in the chatterbox about becomming a saint. From his node I found How You (Yes You!) Can Get Involved, which got me thinking. I've wanted to contribute in some way, but haven't known how, and this seemed just the ticket.
I decided to review code that I am already somewhat familiar with as a jumping off point. I've decided to review YaBB. Maybe it needs it, maybe it doesn't, but it's a start, and it's not so huge a project that I wouldn't know where to begin.
I do code reviews at work occasionally, and we have templates that we use which simplify the process by showing what should be checked, and provide a concise way to report back.
Our template is for VB/Pick BASIC. It won't really work for this.
I found a lot of great points, and some lists of what to look for, but it seemed that nobody had ever pulled it all together and made any hard decisions on what to look for, and what format to submit the information in.
This is my desire. I'd like to see the above. Something all of us could use as a standard for reviewing code. A Perlmonks standard, if you will.
My feeling is that there needs to be perhaps three levels of code review:
We all have differing amounts of time that we can devote to projects like this. When we do decide to help out in this manner, it would be great to have a template to use as a starting point, modify it as appropriate, and go from there.
Am I missing something that's already out there, or perhaps my first mission to give back to the community should be to push for and assist in the making of the above? Is there someone who's already got something like this worked up that could be shared with the rest of us?
Hoping for a yes to the above.