codereview介绍[通俗易懂]

codereview介绍[通俗易懂]1.定义:Codereviewissystematicexamination(oftenknownaspeerreview)ofcomputersourcecode.Itis

大家好,又见面了,我是你们的朋友全栈君。如果您正在找激活码,请点击查看最新教程,关注关注公众号 “全栈程序员社区” 获取激活教程,可能之前旧版本教程已经失效.最新Idea2022.1教程亲测有效,一键激活。

Jetbrains全系列IDE使用 1年只要46元 售后保障 童叟无欺

1. 定义:

Code review is systematic examination (often known as peer review) of computer source code. It is intended to find and fix mistakes overlooked in the initial development phase, improving both the overall quality of software and the developers’ skills. Reviews are done in various forms such as pair programming, informal walkthroughs, and formal inspections

2. 介绍

Code reviews can often find and remove common vulnerabilities such as format string exploitsrace conditionsmemory leaks and buffer overflows, thereby improving software security. Online software repositories based on Subversion (with Redmine or Trac), MercurialGit or others allow groups of individuals to collaboratively review code. Additionally, specific tools for collaborative code review can facilitate the code review process.

Automated code reviewing software lessens the task of reviewing large chunks of code on the developer by systematically checking source code for known vulnerabilities. A 2012 study by VDC Research reports that 17.6% of the embedded software engineers surveyed currently use automated tools for peer code review and 23.7% expect to use them within 2 years.[2]

Capers Jones’ ongoing analysis of over 12,000 software development projects showed that the latent defect discovery rate of formal inspection is in the 60-65% range.[ambiguous] For informal inspection, the figure is less than 50%.[citation needed] The latent defect discovery rate for most forms of testing is about 30%.[3]

Typical code review rates are about 150 lines of code per hour. Inspecting and reviewing more than a few hundred lines of code per hour for critical software (such as safety critical embedded software) may be too fast to find errors.[4][5] Industry data indicates that code reviews can accomplish at most an 85% defect removal rate with an average rate of about 65%.[6]

The types of defects detected in code reviews have also been studied. Based on empirical evidence it seems that up to 75% of code review defects affect software evolvability rather than functionality making code reviews an excellent tool for software companies with long product or system life cycles

3.分类:

Code review practices fall into three main categories: pair programming, formal code review and lightweight code review.[1]

Formal code review, such as a Fagan inspection, involves a careful and detailed process with multiple participants and multiple phases. Formal code reviews are the traditional method of review, in which software developers attend a series of meetings and review code line by line, usually using printed copies of the material. Formal inspections are extremely thorough and have been proven effective at finding defects in the code under review.[citation needed]

Lightweight code review typically requires less overhead than formal code inspections, though it can be equally effective when done properly.[citation needed]Lightweight reviews are often conducted as part of the normal development process:

  • Over-the-shoulder – One developer looks over the author’s shoulder as the latter walks through the code.
  • Email pass-around – Source code management system emails code to reviewers automatically after checkin is made.
  • Pair Programming – Two authors develop code together at the same workstation, such is common in Extreme Programming.
  • Tool-assisted code review – Authors and reviewers use specialized tools designed for peer code review.

Some of these may also be labeled a “Walkthrough” (informal) or “Critique” (fast and informal).

Many teams that eschew traditional, formal code review use one of the above forms of lightweight review as part of their normal development process. A code review case study published in the book Best Kept Secrets of Peer Code Review found that lightweight reviews uncovered as many bugs as formal reviews, but were faster and more cost-effective.

4.常见的code-review tool

开源软件:

比较:

Software Maintainer Development status License VCS supported Platforms supported Workflow Cost
Differential (Phabricator) phabricator.org actively developed Apache v2 Subversion, Git, Mercurial PHP pre-commit, post-commit Free
Gerrit Shawn Pearce actively developed Apache v2 Git Java EE pre-commit Free
Review Board reviewboard.org actively developed MIT CVS, Subversion, Git, Mercurial, Bazaar, Perforce, ClearCase, Plastic SCM Python mainly pre-commit Free
Rietveld Guido van Rossum actively developed Apache v2 Git, Subversion Python pre-commit Free

reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_review

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tools_for_code_review

版权声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献,该文观点仅代表作者本人。本站仅提供信息存储空间服务,不拥有所有权,不承担相关法律责任。如发现本站有涉嫌侵权/违法违规的内容, 请联系我们举报,一经查实,本站将立刻删除。

发布者:全栈程序员-站长,转载请注明出处:https://javaforall.net/167312.html原文链接:https://javaforall.net

(0)
全栈程序员-站长的头像全栈程序员-站长


相关推荐

  • 递归和迭代的差别

    递归和迭代的差别

    2021年11月30日
    38
  • 全错位排列组合公式_无顺序排列组合公式

    全错位排列组合公式_无顺序排列组合公式不容易系列之一ProblemDescription大家常常感慨,要做好一件事情真的不容易,确实,失败比成功容易多了!做好“一件”事情尚且不易,若想永远成功而总从不失败,那更是难上加难了,就像花钱总是

    2022年8月6日
    8
  • linux安装pycharm详细步骤[通俗易懂]

    linux安装pycharm详细步骤[通俗易懂]一、用xftp远程根据把解压后的安装包文件上传到指定目录/opt/module/。然后,cd/opt/pycharm-community-linux-2018.1.4/bin/,执行以下代码赋予pycharm.sh执行权限[atguigu@hadoop101bin]$chmodu+xpycharm.sh最后,执行$shpycharm.sh启动pycharm[atguigu@hadoop101bin]$pycharm.shStartupError:Unab…

    2022年8月25日
    4
  • asp.net mvc实现文件下载「建议收藏」

    asp.net mvc实现文件下载「建议收藏」前段时间一直对如何解决文件下载的问题比较困惑,对文件下载的问题一直都是用的前端的方式解决的,代码如下//下载functiondownload(filePath){window.open(filePath);}但是这个方法有他的缺陷:1.下载的文件后缀必须为iis程序池中存在的文件2.此方法是通过浏览器打开服务器文件,无法直接下载近期看了asp.net下载文件几种方式…

    2022年7月22日
    11
  • php中_initialize()函数与 __construct()函数的区别说明

    php中_initialize()函数与 __construct()函数的区别说明

    2022年2月8日
    52
  • bs模型的通俗理解_白话

    bs模型的通俗理解_白话要想不用一个数学模型只用大白话说明白Black-Scholes这个伟大的期权类衍生品定价模型,似乎与用地球语言解释火星文化一样的困难。所以我的所谓白话也不可能是真的大白话了,总要摆出几个简单的数模以说明问题。只不过这些数学上的东西我相信有一点数学和统计学基础的朋友都能看的明白了。事实上即使摆出一大堆数学模型,我也没有能力真的写出其推导的全过程。幸好我的目的不是写清楚BS模型的推导,而是从其原理性的

    2022年4月19日
    41

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注

关注全栈程序员社区公众号