liveBook · Manning

Peer review

Peer review is the assessment of work by knowledgeable colleagues or independent experts to evaluate its quality, correctness, validity, or reasoning and provide feedback.

How 2 Manning books explain it

Writing for Developers: Blogs that get read

The evaluation of a work by one or more knowledgeable colleagues who provide feedback on its quality, completeness, or correctness.

How it is used
Uses colleague feedback to uncover major gaps and omissions in engineering blog drafts.
How deep it goes
Defines the purpose and practical limits of review, but defers detailed review-process navigation.
Examples
Uses omissions involving migration, process impact, original problems, security, and generative-AI feedback.
What you can do after
Diagnose major omissions by soliciting focused colleague feedback and evaluating AI-generated concerns.

Read how Writing for Developers: Blogs that get read explains peer review →

Investing for Programmers

Peer review is the evaluation of an analysis or argument by other knowledgeable people to identify weaknesses and improve its reasoning.

How it is used
Uses informed challenge to refine investment theses and prevent rushed, assumption-driven decisions.
How deep it goes
Provides a practical review loop involving explanation, questioning, documentation, and retrospectives, but not a formal review framework.
Examples
Uses a friend challenging a proposed share purchase, documented investment decisions, and the Buffett–Munger advisory relationship.
What you can do after
Practice/perform peer review by explaining a thesis, inviting challenge, recording expectations, and revisiting the decision.

Read how Investing for Programmers explains peer review →

Related concepts

These guides are generated from the text of Manning books by Manning's knowledge graph and link to the sections they draw on. The full books are available on liveBook and at manning.com.