Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic
 
PerlMonks  

New section/play area for code reviews

by Mungbeans (Pilgrim)
on Apr 18, 2001 at 19:22 UTC ( #73531=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

I've noticed a number of requests for comments on code -- be it style, efficiency, effectiveness etc.

I believe a section devoted to code reviews would be beneficial. E.g. senior monks with the inclination can provide some assistance to acolytes, without cluttering up the main pages.

This would be a good 'learning' resource if, the senior monks received xp rewards for their reviews, and the level of code was less advanced, so that novices (or even the ugly hackers such as myself) weren't too intimidated.

Plus, it wouldn't waste band width -- too much. Nor would it interfere with anyones time if they weren't interested in it.

Comment on New section/play area for code reviews
Re: New section/play area for code reviews
by arturo (Vicar) on Apr 18, 2001 at 19:39 UTC

    It's an idea that's been raised many times before : Code Review (less than a month old), Code Review section, anyone? (seven months old). (Let me remind everyone about the search function -- it's really handy! I tracked down these links by typing "code review" and "code review section" in the search box, although of course I recalled the discussions).

    To the extent that there is a consensus (and this just may be because I'm part of the group that accepts the reasoning), it's that we can use existing code sections such as Craft for these purposes. Think of it as an open workshop, where you display your work (so far) and others come in and offer suggestions for improvement.

    Philosophy can be made out of anything. Or less -- Jerry A. Fodor

Re: New section/play area for code reviews
by Masem (Monsignor) on Apr 18, 2001 at 19:55 UTC
    This might also be something for the likes of the temporary nodes as I proprosed here. Though you'd not be able to vote or the like, and such nodes would not be cataloged, but IMO, I wouldn't want these to be; I'd rather see such temporary nodes used in this fashion to tighten up code before it is posted to something like the true Code section, at which point the newbies can see the code to improve on, and others can offer opinions and rate said code.
    Dr. Michael K. Neylon - mneylon-pm@masemware.com || "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain
Re: New section/play area for code reviews
by qball (Beadle) on Apr 19, 2001 at 00:55 UTC
    I was just thinking about posting the same request until I came across this one.

    Having a section dedicated to those who want to improve on code techniques and overall code look and feel will be most beneficial. I have several programs I'd like to post and get senior monk advice. It's like having senior developers there to help 24/7!

    Maybe we'll see this implemented soon as it will help me become a much better programmer.

    qball~"I have node idea?!"
      And where will all of the senior monk advice come from?

      Trying to do good code reviews takes an order of magnitude more work than answering questions. Of course it provides an order of magnitude more benefit for the listener, but there are an order of magnitude fewer listeners.

      My fear if there is an official section for this is that the ratio between request/assistance will be seriously skewed. (And I say this as one of the people who makes an effort to respond to requests of the form, "I would like feedback on my code.")

        Good point. Code reviews are more work - however I don't necessarily think that there is an order of magnitude fewer listeners.

        These are my thoughts...

        This has to be voluntary - people are busy enough already without more work.

        I've seen a lot of really useful techniques and tricks in the various code examples floating around - but this has been somewhat haphazard. The sheer volume of syntax in Perl means there's a steep learning curve. Don't get me wrong, this is fun, but it'd be nice to see some examples of what people think of as best practice in Perl coding. The discussions here have helped me learn a lot.

        I know that best practice is a nebulous concept (best for hacking, reuse, maintability, winning obscurated contests...). Some short suggestions can help a lot when someone is starting out. On the other hand people learn better by doing, so maybe this is too much hand holding, and maybe I should let people spend some time evolving their own styles anyway.

        With coding, I've learnt most of my coding style/techniques from other people - there's a lot of different examples of perlcode out there that are easily available. However these can differ markedly in style -- and unless you're at an equivalent level of experience it can be pretty hard to see why people did things the way they did. Given the complexity of the perl syntax, this can be pretty hard to do.

        Partly why I'm raising these points is that I finish up shortly in a job and I need to hand my code over to relative Perl neophytes. This means I need to strike a balance between cleverness/efficiency and maintainability/readability. Having a section dedicated to code reviews/best practice etc would help me tell them 'see this is why this looks like this'.

        However having said all that, it looks as if the craft section is the right place for this after all. I was concerned about the volume for requests swamping legitimate craft questions but with careful moderation that shouldn't be a problem.

        Thanks for your comments all!

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://73531]
Approved by root
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (7)
As of 2014-12-21 13:10 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (105 votes), past polls