News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A bogus study on code review by valuearb on Sunday December 24, 2017 @04:43PM (#16001439)
The people who pay my team mostly want bugs fixed. Bugs going in testing are far more expensive to fix than those found in code review.
Re:A bogus study on code review by Clubber on Sunday December 24, 2017 @05:23PM (#16001625)
>Bugs going in testing are far more expensive to fix than those found in code review.

How so? Particularly if you don't do your code review right after development. That holds true for production vs. QA, but I'm not sure it does for QA vs. code review, unless your QA deployment and ticket bounce back process is overly cumbersome and you don't have time planned for it.

Re:A bogus study on code review by valuearb on Monday December 25, 2017 @10:17AM (#16004381)
We always do code review before QA. But our QA process is also multilayered, first layer is QA engineer, next layer is first level business acceptance testing, then another higher level business acceptance testing. Gets pretty expensive once the SR marketing person rejects.

No i didn’t design this process.