Fun, fun, fun. But first … the code review Preparation Process.

Fun, fun, fun

But first … the code review

• Preparation

• Process

Preparation

prepare work products

examine workproducts

prepare reviewpackage

ready forreview?

read package

study workproducts

prepare comments

schedule reviewsend out packages

Author Moderator Reviewers

YN

Work products

• Materials to be reviewed– use cases– class and sequence diagrams– code– test results– complexity risk analysis

• A proposed structure for the review– table of contents of work products– what will be reviewed and the order– what types of issues will be covered

roadmap to code

Structure for the review

• What will be reviewed and the order– Choose use cases/sequence diagrams that

“cover” the majority of (important) code.– Choose classes that are better reviewed

independently– Propose an order of materials so that all

important code is reviewed

Dates

• Author/moderator: when will the work materials be ready?

Preparation




ready forreview?

read package

study workproducts

prepare comments



YN

Review package

• Intro

• Agenda: The order materials will be reviewed and who is responsible for what

• Criteria (checklist)

Review - criteria

These need to be determined by the author and moderator depending on the situation. For a code review you might consider:

• Does the UML realize the use cases?• Does the code realize the UML?• Does the code reflect good and consistent style?• Is the code easy to understand? Is it simple but not

“clever”? Is it documented as needed?• Is the code efficient?• Is error handling adequate?• Are the underlying algorithm correct and correctly

implemented?• Do common errors occur? missing cases, off-by-one, etc.

Style

• Code appearance: indentation, alignment, whitespace, tabs

• Naming: appropriate choice of names

• Consistency: same style throughout

Preparation




ready forreview?

read package

study workproducts

prepare comments



YN

Reviewer responsibility

• Each reviewer should have specific responsibility

• Review materials relevant to those responsibility – your job is to explain the code to the other reviewers

• Test executable

Review process

• Moderator– leads overall discussion– introduces other team members for their

portions

• Reporter – because we only have four reviewers, the reporter will be from the team being reviewed

Review process cont.

• Reviewers– Each member leads on their portion of the

code, explaining how the code works– When not leading, follow along, raise

questions, concerns, point out problems

• Author– Answers questions but is otherwise silent– Shouldn’t be many questions

Decisions

Problems• Problem needs to be fixed and results re-reviewed• Problem needs to be fixed but no re-review necessary

Review• Code does not pass – total re-review necessary• Code passes conditionally – some things need to be

fixed and re-reviewed• Code passes – may need some fixes but the reviewers

don’t need to see them again

Preparation

• LOTS

• We’ll use class time Wed. for you to get ready

But today

• fun, fun, fun

• count off: 0,1…

• group by k mod 4

Brainstorm

• 5 minutes:– what are really cool things you’ve seen in

games; i.e. people catching on fire in sims

• 10 minutes for team game:– >10 things they can do to enhance the fun

factor– record the suggestions for your team

Team meetings

• Discuss & prioritize the recommendations

• Note: you are not expected to implement these (though they may be implemented over the summer)

Fun, fun, fun. But first … the code review Preparation Process.

Documents

Transcript of Fun, fun, fun. But first … the code review Preparation Process.