Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!tada
From: tada@athena.mit.edu (Michael Zehr)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: code reviews
Summary: suggestions wanted
Message-ID: <12047@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 16 Jun 89 14:42:03 GMT
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: tada@athena.mit.edu (Michael Zehr)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 22

At the request of one of our clients, my company is about to have it's
first code review.  I've read a fair amount about the benefits of code
reviews, but very little on methods or procedures.  

Among the 30 other programmers here, only 2 (that i know of) have ever
been invovled in a code review.  From talking with them, i gather that
there are typically two kinds of reviews -- formal design/functionality
reviews, and informal peer reviews, covering implementation details.  

The review requested by the client is supposed to be a formal algorithm
and functionality review.  We have a fairly good idea how to handle that
-- the client is really only interested in making sure someone else
(mainly the project manager) has looked at my program and verified that
it's correct (above and beyond normal testing that would be done).  

Since part of my job here is to improve programmer productivity, i'm
interested in eventually implementing some sort of procedure for
periodic peer reviews.  Does anyone have suggestions or
reccommendations?

thanks for any advice,
michael j zehr