Avoiding the cost of context switching caused by code viewing

Question

We are currently a team of 4-5 developers working on the Agile process. To improve the quality of our code, we have a strict code verification policy: no code can be transferred to the main branch unless another pair of eyes checks the code.

Although we help a lot, we feel that there is significant overhead caused by the review. Time to consider is not a problem; context switching is a big problem; combined with another best practice of having small commits, the result is that our coders often cannot code for more than an hour or so without interrupting to view the code. Context switching is a problem.

Delaying the code review phase for a certain hour at the end of the working day is not as smooth as it might seem in practice. There are many dependencies in the code that need to be checked until they are built; therefore, this scenario also leads to frequent code reviews.

Answer 1

I would agree with a useful code review. The benefits are pretty good documented , Code Complete says.

average design and code verification performance is 55 and 60 percent.

However, there are a number of things you can do to make them easier.

. Frequency Ducicultly , , , . , , .

- (, XP). -, , - . , , ( ).

( ). , . , .

( , FxCop, NDepends .Net) , . , , , . , , , , . .

Answer 2

, , . , , , . , / ( ). , , Main (trunk), . , , .

Answer 3

, . , 2-3 , , , ( , ).

, , .