Code review is a regular examination of source code to make it more readable, maintainable, and as error-free as possible before deployment. No contributor’s code is exempt, including a CTO’s. Review works alongside coding standards, which can cover structure, design patterns, logging, and naming—not just formatting. section 9.2
Use a review to ask:
- Does the code follow the team’s evolving standards, and can another developer understand and maintain it? section 9.2
- Is adequate source documentation present? Where a decision looks unusual, would a comment or ticket link explain why it exists? section 11.2.6
- Does a shortcut create technical debt that should be flagged and added to the backlog? section 9.6
- Could user input or an interaction between features create a security problem? Training and code-quality tools help, but neither removes the need for experienced human review. section 12.7.1
A fix the tool may miss
A short-term fix can be syntactically valid and escape a code-analysis warning while still needing a more complete solution. Flag it during review and put the follow-up in the backlog rather than letting the shortcut disappear into the codebase. section 9.6
Make review routine, not a claim that every defect will be caught. Code-quality tools such as SonarQube can find standard issues; reviewers also need to judge intent, documentation, debt, and risks the tools miss. section 9.2 section 12.7.1
