The most up to date version of this process is available as a Claude command in my dot-claude repository.

• Verify that the build/tests pass
• Read the issue title and description
• New code
  • Understand the feature and associated requirements that are supposed to be implemented
  • Verify code implements the desired feature and that the requirements are completed
• New/Changed code
  • Check code contains tests
    • Is all the new code covered by those tests?
  • Verify the location of new/moved files
    • Are the files in the right directory?
    • Are they appropriately named?
  • Verify classes, methods, functions, parameters naming
    • Are they significant of their purpose?
    • Are they clear enough?
    • Are they respecting the naming convention?
  • Does the code respect SOLID?
  • Consider that when functions/methods signature change, code may now be backward incompatible.
    • Discuss whether this is necessary
    • Backward incompatible changes should be documented
  • In a weak typed or type hinted language, are parameters and return of functions/methods typed?
  • Are there TODOs that should be completed within this review?
  • Check code for code style issues
• Bug fix
  • Verify that the fix is applied at the right location and will not "fix the symptoms, not the cause"

When reviewing

• Provide specific and actionable feedback
• Clearly mark nitpicks and optional comments
  • Alternatively, use an approach such as RFC2219 where you indicate whether a change is a MUST, SHOULD, or MAY
  • I've used traffic light color emojis to communicate 🔴 MUST, 🟡 SHOULD, 🟢 MAY
  • Another emoji based option is gitmoji
• Assume competence
• Provide rationale or context
• Consider how comments may be interpreted
• Don't criticize the person, criticize the code
• Don't use harsh language

Reference

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID
• https://medium.com/palantir/code-review-best-practices-19e02780015f
• https://phauer.com/2018/code-review-guidelines/
• https://smartbear.com/learn/code-review/guide-to-code-review-process/
• https://smartbear.com/learn/code-review/best-practices-for-peer-code-review/
• https://nyu-cds.github.io/effective-code-reviews/03-checklist/
• https://google.github.io/eng-practices/
• https://testing.googleblog.com/2019/11/code-health-respectful-reviews-useful.html
• https://engineering.18f.gov/code-review/
• https://conventionalcomments.org/
• https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/code_review.html
• https://gitmoji.dev/

It's highly common when working that priorities shift and that sometimes you have way more on your plate than you can handle.

No need to panic!

• Ignore your task list
• Use your brain and create a fresh list of what you think is the most important
• Prioritize using the importance/urgency matrix

• Have a question
• Ask LLMs
• Identify the field that would best answer this question
• Search online
• Search for articles and books on the topic
• Determine the likelihood that this field has already been researched

• Read the table of contents
• Rapidly skim through the various sections of the book
• Determine what you want to get out of the book
• Ask yourself questions about what you briefly read

References

• https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/2015/01/19/speed-reading-redo/

• What did you do this week/today?
• Do you want to talk about anything? (Not language related)
• Summarize tasks given during the exchange
• Plan next exchange

Structured

• Pronunciation
• Can you say ...?
• How do you say ...?
• Goal specific discussions

Unstructured

• What do you think of ...?
• What do you want ...?