🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 11:10:15 PM UTC-5, Charles Richmond wrote:
> On 2/22/2018 7:02 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> > On 2018-02-22, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Debugging can be similar to this.  You can work for hours to track down
> >> a bug... only to find out that you did something very stupid to cause
> >> the problem!!!  Most bugs I tracked down... ended up being bone-headed
> >> mistakes instead of important conceptual errors in implementing an
> >> algorithm.
> > 
> > And, of course, after slaving over it for hours, a cow orker walking by
> > will spot it instantly.
> > 
> 
> Sometimes that's true...  That's why code reviews can be so useful:  you 
> have to explain your code to cow-orkers and you get to look harder at 
> the code when you explain.

Yes, code reviews are very helpful per the above, and other reasons, too.

But how often are they practiced?  My own experience has been no
manager or analyst ever cared to see work, even when asked to do so.

I knew of one site that did do code reviews, but it was to check
for compliance with the site's numerous coding standards.  These
were things like requiring data fields appear alphabetically, and
using COBOL 01 levels instead of 77s.  Stuff like that, that really
didn't make a difference in performance or readability.  They 
seemed to spend an awful lot of time on compliance, but I don't
think their work was, in the end, any better than other sites.
I sure as heck wouldn't want to work there.  

I had to deal with them on some issues, and they were a 
P.I.T.A. to deal with.  For instance, the programmer I
was dealing with did not have a telephone (their programmers
did not have phones, only analysts and managers had them.)
When I needed to call him, I had to call his manager.  His
manager treated my calls as "personal calls", even though
they were business.  The manager got rather officious with
me, but I threw it right back at him.  I really don't like
to do business like that.

FWIW, it seems to me that people were more cooperative years
ago than they are today.