Search Results

Search found 1308 results on 53 pages for 'reviews'.

Page 4/53 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Picking a code review tool

  - by marcog

  We are a startup looking to migrate from Fogbugz/Kiln to a new issue tracker/code review system. We are very happy with Jira, especially the configurability, but we are undecided on a code review tool. We have been trialing Bitbucket, but it doesn't fit our workflow well. Here are the problems we have identified with BB: Comments can be hard to find: when commenting on code not visible in the diff when code that is commented on is later changed viewing the full file doesn't include comments (also doesn't show changes) Viewing comments on individual commits can be a pain We have the implementer merge the diff and close the issue, whereas pull requests are more suited to the open source model where someone with commit rights merges We would like to automate creation of the code review (either from Jira or a command line tool) No syntax highlighting Once the pull request exceeds a certain size, BB won't show the whole thing and you have to view individual commits Linking BB pull requests to Jira issues is a bit janky: we have a pull request URL field on Jira, but this doesn't work when there are changes in multiple repositories Does anyone have any good suggestion given the above? We are tight on budget, and Jira integration is a big plus. We also have multiple commits per issue, and would like to have the option of viewing individual commits in the review. It might also be worth noting that we have a separate reviewer and tester for each issue.

  Read the article

• Making Use of Plan Explorer in my own Environment

  - by Jonathan Kehayias

  Back in October 2010, I briefly blogged about the SQL Sentry Plan Explorer in my blog post wrap up for SQL Bits 7 and how impressed I was with what I saw from a Alpha demo standpoint from Greg Gonzalez ( Blog | Twitter ) while I was at SQLBits 7 in York.  To be 100% honest and transparent, Greg gave me early access to this tool after discussing it at SQLBits 7, and I had the opportunity to test a number of pre-Beta releases where I was able to offer significant feedback and submit bugs in the...(read more)

  Read the article

• How to measure code quality? [closed]

  - by Lo Wai Lun

  Is there a methodology or any objective standard to determine whether the code of the project is well-written? How to measure in a structural and scientific manner to access the quality of the code? Many people say code review is important and always do encapsulation and data abstraction to ensure the quality. How can we determine the quality? Can a structural, organised software design diagrams drawn implies good quality of code ? If we type the code with good cautions of encapsulation and data abstraction, why review anyway?

  Read the article

• Making Use of Plan Explorer in my own Environment

  - by Jonathan Kehayias

  Back in October 2010, I briefly blogged about the SQL Sentry Plan Explorer in my blog post wrap up for SQL Bits 7 and how impressed I was with what I saw from a Alpha demo standpoint from Greg Gonzalez ( Blog | Twitter ) while I was at SQLBits 7 in York.  To be 100% honest and transparent, Greg gave me early access to this tool after discussing it at SQLBits 7, and I had the opportunity to test a number of pre-Beta releases where I was able to offer significant feedback and submit bugs in the...(read more)

  Read the article

• Code review “on a napkin” — could it be useful?

  - by gaRex

  Preconditions Team uses DVCS IDE supports comments parsing (like TODO and etc.) Tools like CodeCollaborator are expensive for budget Tools like gerrit are too complex for install or not usable Workflow Author publishes somewhere on central repo feature branch Reviewer fetch it and start review In case of some question/issue reviewer create comment with special label, like "BLA". Such label MUST not be in production code -- only on review stage: $somevar = 123; // BLA Why do echo this here? echo $somevar; When reviewer finish post comments -- it just commits with stupid message "comments" and pushes back Author pulls feature branch back and answer comments in similar way or improve code and push it back When "BLA" comments have gone we can think, that review has successfully finished. Author interactively rebases feature branch, stashes it to remove those "comment" commits and now is ready to merge feature to develop or make any action that usualy could be after successful internal review IDE support I know, that custom comment tags are possible in eclipse & netbeans. Sure it also should be in blablaStorm family. So my specific questions are Do you think this methodology is viable? Do you know something similar? What can be improved in it? ps: migrated from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12692695/code-review-on-a-napkin-could-it-be-useful

  Read the article

• Tool to identify potential reviewers for a proposed change

  - by Lorin Hochstein

  Is there a tool that takes as input a proposed patch and a git repository, and identifies the developers are the best candidates for reviewing the patch? It would use the git history to identify the authors that have the most experience with the files / sections of code that are being changed. Edit: The use case is a large open source project (OpenStack Compute), where merge proposals come in, and I see a merge proposal on a chunk of code I'm not familiar with, and I want to add somebody else's name to the list of suggested reviewers so that person gets a notification to look at the merge proposal.

  Read the article

• Advancing Code Review and Unit Testing Practice

  - by Graviton

  As a team lead managing a group of developers with no experience ( and see no need) in code review and unit testing, how can you advance code review and unit testing practice? How are you going to create a way so that code review and unit testing to naturally fit into the developer's flow? One of the resistance of these two areas is that "we are always tight on dateline, so no time for code review and unit testing". Another resistance for code review is that we currently don't know how to do it. Should we review the code upon every check-in, or review the code at a specified date?

  Read the article

• Is a code review which uses only code comments a good idea?

  - by gaRex

  Preconditions Team uses DVCS IDE supports comments parsing (like TODO and etc.) Tools like CodeCollaborator are expensive for budget Tools like gerrit are too complex for install or not usable Workflow Author publishes somewhere on central repo feature branch Reviewer fetch it and start review In case of some question/issue reviewer create comment with special label, like "REV". Such label MUST not be in production code -- only on review stage: $somevar = 123; // REV Why do echo this here? echo $somevar; When reviewer finish post comments -- it just commits with stupid message "comments" and pushes back Author pulls feature branch back and answer comments in similar way or improve code and push it back When "REV" comments have gone we can think, that review has successfully finished. Author interactively rebases feature branch, squashes it to remove those "comment" commits and now is ready to merge feature to develop or make any action that usualy could be after successful internal review IDE support I know, that custom comment tags are possible in eclipse & netbeans. Sure it also should be in blablaStorm family. Questions Do you think this methodology is viable? Do you know something similar? What can be improved in it?

  Read the article

• Building a common syntax and scoping framework.

  - by Ben DeMott

  Hello fellow programmers, I was discussing a project the other day with a colleague of mine and I was curious to see what others had to say or if such a thing already existed. Background There are many programming languages. There are many IDE's and source editors that highlight and edit source code. Following perfectly and exactly the rules of a language to present auto-complete options and understand scopes in the code is rather complex. This task is complex enough that most IDE's implement different source-editors as plugins that often re-implement the same features over and over but in a different way (netbeans). From what I can tell most IDE's and source editors re-implement parsers that use regular expressions, or some meta-syntax Naur Form to describe the languages grammer generically. These parsers are implemented over and over and over again. Question Has anyone attempted to unify or describe a set of features through an API and have a consistent interface to parsing various programming languages and dialects. I'm not describing an IDE - but a consistent API for any program to use to parse and obtain meta-information from the source code. I realize various programming languages offer many different features which are difficult to 'abstract' into a set of features, but I feel this would be a worthwhile venture. It seems to me that this could possibly allow the authors of interpreters to help maintain a central grammer intepreter for their language. the Python foundation could maintain the Python grammer api, ANSI the C grammer api, Oracle the Java grammer API, etc Example usage If this was API existed code documentation generators could theoretically work across all dialects and languages to some level. It wouldn't matter if your project used 5 different languages a single application could document all of them and the comments and doc-tags within. Has anyone attempted this comprehensively?

  Read the article

• Annotate source code with diagrams as comments

  - by Steven Lu

  I write a lot of (primarily c++ and javascript) code that touches upon computational geometry and graphics and those kinds of topics, so I have found that visual diagrams have been an indispensable part of the process of solving problems. I have determined just now that "oh, wouldn't it just be fantastic if I could somehow attach a hand-drawn diagram to a piece of code as a comment", and this would allow me to come back to something I worked on, days, weeks, months earlier and far more quickly re-grok my algorithms. As a visual learner, I feel like this has the potential to improve my productivity with almost every type of programming because simple diagrams can help with understanding and reasoning about any type of non-trivial data structure. Graphs for example. During graph theory class at university I had only ever been able to truly comprehend the graph relationships that I could actually draw diagrammatical representations of. So... No IDE to my knowledge lets you save a picture as a comment to code. My thinking was that I or someone else could come up with some reasonably easy-to-use tool that can convert an image into a base64 binary string which I can then insert into my code. If the conversion/insertion process can be streamlined enough it would allow a far better connection between the diagram and the actual code, so I no longer need to chronographically search through my notebooks. Even more awesome: plugins for the IDEs to automatically parse out and display the image. There is absolutely nothing difficult about this from a theoretical point of view. My guess is that it would take some extra time for me to actually figure out how to extend my favorite IDEs and maintain these plugins, so I'd be totally happy with a sort of code post-processor which would do the same parsing out and rendering of the images and show them side by side with the code, inside of a browser or something. Since I'm a javascript programmer by trade. What do people think? Would anyone pay for this? I would.

  Read the article

• As a solo programmer, of what use can Gerrit be?

  - by s.d

  Disclaimer: I'm aware of the questions How do I review my own code? and What advantages do continuous integration tools offer on a solo project?. I do feel that this question aims at a different set of answers though, as it is about a specific software, and not about general musings about the use of this or that practice or tech stack. I'm a solo programmer for an Eclipse RCP-based project. To be able to control myself and the quality of my software, I'm in the process of setting up a CSI stack. In this, I follow the Eclipse Common Build Infrastructure guidelines, with the exception that I will use Jenkins rather than Hudson. Sticking to these guidelines will hopefully help me in getting used to the Eclipse way of doing things, and I hope to be able to contribute some code to Eclipse in the future. However, CBI includes Gerrit, a code review software. While I think it's really helpful for teams, and I will employ it as soon as the team grows to at least two developers, I'm wondering how I could use it while I'm still solo. Question: Is there a use case for Gerrit that takes into account solo developers? Notes: I can imagine reviewing code myself after a certain amount of time to gain a little distance to it. This does complicate the workflow though, as code will only be built once it's been passed through code review. This might prove to be a "trap" as I might be tempted to quickly push bad code through Gerrit just to get it built. I'm very interested in hearing how other solo devs have made use of Gerrit.

  Read the article

• Case Management Patterns with Oracle Unified Business Process Management Suite

  - by Ajay Khanna

  Contributed by Heidi Buelow, Oracle Product Management Case Management was a hot topic all week at Oracle OpenWorld so I was excited to share our current features and upcoming plans at the session Thursday morning on Case Management Patterns with Oracle Unified Business Process Management Suite.  My colleague, Ravi Rangaswamy, the Case Management Development Manager, and I, Heidi Buelow, the Case Management Product Manager, discussed case management use case patterns with an interested audience.  We also talked about the current BPM Suite offering for Case Managment and showed a demo of our upcoming release where Case Management becomes a first class component in a BPM composite application. Case Management use case patterns cover a wide range of horizontal applications such as Accounts Payable, Dispute Resolution, Call Center, Employee OnBoarding, and many vertical applications in domains and industries such as Public Sector services, Insurance claims, and Healthcare.  Really, it is any use case where the resolution of a request may require a knowledge worker making decisions using experienced judgement in the current situation.  This allows for expidited care and customer satisfaction, both being highly valued for consumer loyalty, regulatory compliance, and efficient resolution. Today, BPM Suite provides the tools for creating Case Management applications using BPMN 2.0, Business Rules, and rich BAM and Case Analytics.  The Process Composer provides the agility to change rules and processes by the business users.  The case manager and case workers have the flexibilty they need.  With integrated content management and the concept of a BPM Process Spaces instance (case) space, the current release enables case management use case applications. In the next release, Case Management becomes a first class component. By this, we mean, Case is a separate component in the composite.  We are adding case attributes such as milestones, case events, case stakeholders, and more, providing a rich toolset for the use cases that require a flexible Case Management approach.  Activites become available according to the conditions that you specify and information can be protected by permissions indicated.  In BPM Studio, you design a Case and associate all of the attributes and activities that are needed, yet, at runtime you have the flexibility to add and change these as needed. We enjoyed sharing Case Management and it was well received by the audience.  The presentation is available online and we have viewlets of the demo that will be available at release time.

  Read the article

• How do you get positive criticism on your code?

  - by burnt1ce

  My team rarely does code review, mainly because we don't have enough time and people lack the energy and will to do so. But I would really like to know what people think about my code when they read it. This way, I have a better understanding how other people think and tailor my code accordingly so it's easier to read. So my question is, how do I get positive criticism on my code? My intent is to understand how people think so I can write more readable code.

  Read the article

• Releasing an open source project without getting embarrassed

  - by Hopeful

  I've been working by myself on a fairly large open source project for quite a while and it's nearing the point where I'd like to release it. However, I'm self-taught and I don't really know anyone who could adequately review my project. A few years ago, I had released a small bit of code which pretty much got ripped apart (in a critical sense) on the forum where I released it. Even though the code worked, the criticism was accurate but brutal. It prompted me to begin searching for best practices for everything and in the end I feel that it made me a much better developer. I've gone over everything in my project so many times trying to make it perfect that I've lost count. I believe in my project and think it has the potential to help a lot of people and I feel like I've done some cool things in interesting ways with it. Still, because I'm self-taught, I can't help but wonder what gaps exist in my self-education. The way my code was ripped apart last time isn't something I'd like to repeat. I think my two biggest fears with releasing my project that I've poured countless hours into are being absolutely embarrassed because I missed some patently obvious things because of my self-education or, worse, releasing it to the sound of crickets. Is there anyone who has been in a similar situation? I'm not afraid of constructive criticism, so long as it is constructive and not just a rant on how I screwed up. I know there is a code review site on StackExchange, but it's not really set up for large projects and I didn't feel like the community there is large enough yet to get good feedback if I were to post parts of my project piecemeal (I tried with one file). What can I do to give my project at least some measure of success without getting embarrassed or devestated in the process?

  Read the article

• What is the way to understand someone else's giant uncommented spaghetti code? [closed]

  - by Anisha Kaul

  Possible Duplicate: I’ve inherited 200K lines of spaghetti code — what now? I have been recently handled a giant multithreaded program with no comments and have been asked to understand what it does, and then to improve it (if possible). Are there some techniques which should be followed when we need to understand someone else's code? OR do we straightaway start from the first function call and go on tracking next function calls? C++ (with multi-threading) on Linux

  Read the article

• Code Review process

  - by Rubio

  I'm looking for a light-weight code review process. A couple of requirements, the reviewer must be able to do the review alone at the time of his/her choosing (not tied to check-ins), the reviewer must be able to easily find the target code, the review has to leave some document showing what was reviewed. I know there are tools available for code review but I work in a very ridig environment and introducing new tools is not an option. One idea I've been thinking about is to create a new Visual Studio Task List token called REVIEW, and use it to mark the code that needs reviewing. Something like, // REVIEW doe_john: New method, not sure about the exception. Then we would add a Review workitem in TFS (we're using the CMM template). Another possibility, which I would actually prefer, would be to have developers create a TFS Review workitem and add links to code to it, but I don't know if this is possible. Obviously you can add a link to a file, but I'd like to have a link to a particular method.

  Read the article

• Best way to relate code smells to a non technical audience?

  - by Ed Guiness

  I have been asked to present examples of code issues that were found during a code review. My audience is mostly non-technical and I want to try to express the issues in such a way that I convey the importance of "good code" versus "bad code". But as I review my presentation it seems to me I've glossed over the reasons why it is important to write good code. I've mentioned a number of reasons including ease of maintenance, increased likelihood of bugs, but with my "non tech" hat on they seem unconvincing. What is your advice for helping a non-technical audience relate to the importance of good code?

  Read the article

• Diff annotation tool

  - by l0b0

  Among the 11 proven practices for more effective, efficient peer code review, diff annotation seems to be the one particularly well suited to tool assistance. The article is written by the architect of SmartBear's CodeCollaborator, so he of course recommends using that. Does anyone know of any alternatives? I can't think of anything that would be even close to paper+pen+marker in pure developer efficiency when it comes to explaining a piece of code.

  Read the article

• How can you get constructive criticism for your code?

  - by burnt1ce

  My team rarely does code review, mainly because we don't have enough time and people lack the energy and will to do so. But I would really like to know what people think about my code when they read it. This way, I have a better understanding how other people think and tailor my code accordingly so it's easier to read. So my question is, how can I get constructive criticism for my code? My intent is to understand how people think so I can write more readable code.

  Read the article

• How should Code Review be Carried Out?

  - by Graviton

  My previous question has to do with how to advance code review among the developers. Here I am interested in how the code review session should be carried out, so that both the reviewer and reviewed are feeling comfortable about it. I have done some code review before, but the experience sucks big time. My previous manager would come to us-- on an ad hoc basis-- and tell us to explain our code to him. Since he wasn't very familiar with the code base, I spent a huge amount of times explaining just the most basic structure of my code to him. This took a long time and by the time we were done, we were both exhausted. Then he would raise issues with my code. Most issues he raised were cosmetic in nature ( e.g, don't use region for this code block, change the variable name from xxx to yyy even though the later makes even less sense, and so on). We did this a few rounds, and the review session didn't derive much benefits for us, and we stopped. What do you have to do, in order to make code review a natural, enjoyable, thought stimulating, bug-fixing and mutual-learning experience?

  Read the article

• Gerrit, git and reviewing whole branch

  - by liori

  I'm now learning Gerrit (which is the first code review tool I use). Gerrit requires a reviewed change to consist of a single commit. My feature branch has about 10 commits. The gerrit-prefered way is to squash those 10 commits into a single one. However this way if the commit will be merged into the target branch, the internal history of that feature branch will be lost. For example, I won't be able to use git-bisect to bisect into those commits. Am I right? I am a little bit worried about this state of things. What is the rationale for this choice? Is there any way of doing this in Gerrit without losing history?

  Read the article

• Difference between jquery.clone() and simple concatenation of string [closed]

  - by Francis Cebu

  Which of the following code samples is faster in generating HTML code using jQuery? Sample 1: var div = $("<div>"); $.each(data,function(count,item){ var Elem = div.clone().addClass("message").html(item.Firstname); $(".container").append(Elem); }); Sample 2: $.each(data,function(count,item){ var Elem = "<div class = 'Elem'>" + item.Firstname + "</div>"; $(".container").append(Elem); });

  Read the article

• Network Your Computers & Devices: Step by Step

  - by The Geek

  If you’re looking for a great book to help you learn more about Windows home networking, there’s a new book on the market by our good friend Ciprian, and published by none other than Microsoft Press. Note: our friend Ciprian has been a guest contributor here on How-To Geek in the past, and he’s not only a geek that knows what he’s talking about, he’s also one of the more honest and decent people I’ve worked with. In his spare time, he runs the 7 Tutorials web site. The Book One of the great things about this book is that you aren’t limited to just Windows networking—it also explains how to connect Windows 7, XP, Vista, Mac OS X, and even Linux on the same network and share folders and devices between them. Everything in the book is written in a typical How-To Geek step-by-step format, with plenty of screenshots and pictures to help you through the process. Book Outline If you’re going to be spending some money on the book, you probably want to know what it’s all about, and since the Amazon page doesn’t give, well, much information at all, here’s the entire outline for you: Setting Up a Router and Devices Setting User Account on All Computers Setting Up Your Libraries on All Windows 7 Computers Creating the Network Customizing Network Sharing Settings in Windows 7 Creating the Homegroup and Joining Windows 7 Computers Sharing Libraries and Folders Sharing and Working with Devices Streaming Media Over the Network and the Internet Sharing Between Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 Computers Sharing Between Mac OS X and Windows 7 Computers Sharing Between Ubuntu Linux and Windows 7 Computers Keeping the Network Secure Setting Up Parental Controls Troubleshooting Network and Internet Problems It’s a great book, with loads of information, and compared to most tech books isn’t very expensive—only $19.79 for the paperback and $9.99 for the Kindle version. Well worth it, and hey, it’s an official Microsoft Press book—written by a How-To Geek guest author. Network Your Computers & Devices Step by Step [Amazon] Latest Features How-To Geek ETC How To Boot 10 Different Live CDs From 1 USB Flash Drive The 20 Best How-To Geek Linux Articles of 2010 The 50 Best How-To Geek Windows Articles of 2010 The 20 Best How-To Geek Explainer Topics for 2010 How to Disable Caps Lock Key in Windows 7 or Vista How to Use the Avira Rescue CD to Clean Your Infected PC 2011 International Space Station Calendar Available for Download (Free) Ultimate Elimination – Lego Black Ops [Video] BotSync Enables Secure FTP File Synchronization on Android Devices Enjoy Beautiful City Views with the Cityscape Theme for Windows 7 Luigi Installs Any OS on Google’s Cr-48 Notebook DIY iPad Stylus Offers Pen-Based Interaction on the Cheap

  Read the article

• Need Help in Pointing to focus on the Key elements in Code Review Phase?

  - by Sankar Ganesh

  Hi Friends, Let us share your views on the Code Review process, If someone gave a code snippet and ask you to review that code, then what are the major things you will focus on that code Review process. For Instance: I will check any dead code is available in that code, other than Checking Dead Code, what are the key elements to be focused on CODE REVIEW PROCESS. Thanks For Sharing Your Views Sankar Ganesh.S

  Read the article

• Combining Code Review with Trust Metrics

  - by DragonFax

  I don't get the chance to partake of it at work. But I love the idea of code review. Especially of online open source code review like Gerrit Code Review. I love what Trust Metrics have done for forums and collective intelligences sites on the internet like stackexchange, reddit, and wikipedia. Would it be possible to combine the two and come up with an open source project management system. Something that ends up being mostly community driven. Perhaps a kind of wikipedia of code for a project. Where submitters become popular/trusted by having lots of patches reviewed favoriably by others, and accepted into the trunk. And popular/trusted submitters get their patchs accepted faster/easier. I'm looking for some opinions on the idea, or perhaps pointers to where its been done before, if thats the case. This might leave the lead maintiner little more to do than: wrangle the direction of the project by fast-tracking or vetoing specific patches. settling disputes when the CI tests break, or fixing it himself. Is design by community worse than design by committee?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >