I've recently been given access to a new code base. It represents a
reasonably successful product but there's something not quite right.
I spent a while browsing through the code trying to get a feel
of things. The problem is that the code is adequate rather than
There's a fair amount of code duplication. Not out and out cut and
paste (though there's a bit of that too), but similar functionality
acting on different variables or calling with slightly different
parameters. It's all things that could be factored out but haven't
Then there's the code style. It's all incredibly defensive with lots
of checks for null values which are dutifully logged then the
application proceeds on its merry way. So who's to know that
something went wrong?
Comments - well no not really. There's almost a complete absence of
comments, nothing to explain the "why" of what's going on.
So what's the reason for this? The team who wrote the code are a
bright bunch and they've been doing this stuff for a while. There's a
lot of the other trappings of good code development --- unit tests,
continuous integration servers --- but the raw stuff of our craft,
the code, just isn't up to scratch.
I asked about code reviews. They're on the list of things to set up
when the team have the time. Unsurprisingly there's never time as
more features are requested. And anyway who wants to go into a two
hour meeting to have their code picked apart by some smart alec who
thinks they can do better.
So what needs to be done to change this? The goal must be to make the
developers proud of their code, happy to show it to all and sundry and
keen to receive feedback so that they can improve it. But at the
moment every one is sitting in their own cubical, beavering away on
the latest task passed down by the management.
So here's what we're going to try:
- Pick a file that typifies the problem and set the team a challenge.
What's the most elegant way we could write this code?
- Discuss what we mean by "elegant". Obtain team agreement that these
are our values.
- Institute light weight buddy code reviews of all check ins
A side thought: why is it that code reviewers always pick out the
negative? There are a lot of studies singing the praises of positive
enforcement so why don't we try to praise the good bits rather than
pick holes in the bad?