KDG talks about outsourcing code reviews
Code reviewing is useful for making sure your organization puts out clean, maintainable code. Automated tests and quality assurance can spot some bugs, but nothing beats the power of an expert’s perspective.
That’s code reviewing services exist; experts are brought in, and they'll give your codebase a second look to make sure things will work long-term. It keeps the development cycle moving, and cut down on technical debt, on top of outsourced code reviews being easily scalable to the organizations’ needs and schedule.
Not to toot our own horn here, but we here at KDG know a great deal about code reviews. We know how useful it can be for organizations, and how it can help the development process. Some people think that QA is enough, but that’s not the case. Some people need more convincing, and that’s why we’ve put this little article together.
Better code, with less ego-bruising
Looming deadlines put pressure on everyone, which is why critiques can be received, let’s say, in “less-than-ideal” ways. Without the right systems in place, pressure can hurt morale and drag the organization and its coding down.
Outsourcing code review means that the critique is handled by an unbiased third party, who’ll focus on the code itself, not the developer that made it and the environment leading to it. This means that they can focus on the big picture, catching details and flaws that internal reviewers might miss.
Faster reviewing, with less bugs Developers are busy people, there’s no denying that. We here at KDG work with them a lot, so we know how busy they can be. That means that, if they’re reviewing code, they might not be able to focus on it, if their schedule even lets them squeeze that in.
When you outsource code review to a third party, they'll give your codebase a second look and that’s it. They’re not weighed down by anything else, so they can focus on that task, resulting in better and faster results. This, in turn, frees up the developers to work on the code, including any particular issues that the reviewers spot.
Better error discovery and correction
Good code reviews catch accidental and structural errors. While accidental errors are usually just typos, they can actually be particularly hard to spot; hence, all the jokes about semicolons. Structural errors, meanwhile, are more varied, covering things like dead code, performance problems, and the like.
Getting the best code needs reviews from reviewers, as not only can they see issues, but propose solutions that can work well. Feedback is a key part in making sure that code is readable, clean, and runs well.
