Name: Don't Forget: Code Review Is Public And Has Huge Consequences
Uploaded: 2022-04-14T04:47:34+00:00
Duration: 1 min 42 s
Description: In this final segment, we emphasize how code review is not just a technical exercise—it’s a public, cultural signal

Don't Forget: Code Review Is Public And Has Huge Consequences

In this final segment, we emphasize how **code review is not just a technical exercise—it’s a public, cultural signal**. Especially for tech leads and senior engineers, the way feedback is delivered in code review has real consequences for team morale, inclusion, and career development.

### Key Takeaways:

- **We treat code review as a public cultural forum**: Comments are visible to others on the team and can impact how engineers—especially juniors or new hires—are perceived. Feedback that embarrasses someone publicly can harm confidence and even affect performance reviews.
- **We avoid harsh criticism in public threads**: If we’re truly concerned about someone’s patterns (e.g., lack of testing mindset or carelessness), we give that feedback in private, not in a code review. We follow the rule: *Praise in public, critique in private.*
- **We understand the leadership signal we send**: As tech leads, our tone sets the bar. If we leave demoralizing or curt comments, we implicitly encourage others to do the same—fostering a negative or toxic culture.
- **We handle serious feedback face-to-face**: When needed, we schedule a quick 15-minute conversation to deliver constructive criticism with nuance and care—ensuring it’s received in the spirit of growth, not shame.
- **We use code reviews to build people up, not tear them down**: Every interaction is a chance to create a safer, stronger engineering culture. We remember that what we say—and how we say it—has lasting impact.

Ultimately, we believe that **code review is leadership in action**—and great leaders use it to uplift their teams, not diminish them.

In this final segment, we emphasize how code review is not just a technical exercise—it’s a public, cultural signal

[Masterclass] How To Do Amazing Code Review

Code review is one of the most effective ways to learn as a software engineer, especially for those earlier-in-career. Unfortunately, way too many engineering teams get it wrong with slow review speed and low quality comments.

There is a mountain of information in this presentation, so here's our 5 favorite points (in no particular order):
- **Code review is NOT for catching bugs** - Of course, if you find a bug in a PR (pull request), you should call it out, but that's not the primary purpose of code review. The core benefit of code review is to build up engineering culture, propagating best practices amongst the team and growing newer and more junior engineers.
- **Add deep context to your PRs** - Explain what your pull request does and the reasoning behind your approach. Also, *include a test plan.* A test plan is a demo showcasing what your code changes do; try to make it a video/gif, which is especially powerful if you work on front-end (Android/iOS/web). If you can't do a video, try attaching a screenshot or a set of commands to run tests.
- **One diff, one thesis** - Every PR should be focused and atomic: Don't jam the entire new feature you just coded up in a single 1,000+ line PR. Huge commits are hard to review, and your teammates will hate you for it. For the vast majority of cases, you can break down your PRs to 25-250 lines of code.
- **Read others' code reviews** - Similar to so many other things in tech, stand on the shoulders of giants where you can. With code review, this means looking at how senior+ engineers on your team comment on reviews. Try to find patterns in the issues they're finding and incorporate it into how you review code. Revisions that have been rejected with changes requested are a gold mine for this learning.
- **Code review MUST be fast** - When we say fast, we mean that feedback should arrive in <24 hours. What a lot of engineers don't realize is that code review delay is multiplicative: Sometimes commit will need 3-5 revisions before they're able to be merged. If turnaround is 2+ days, this can easily lead to commits taking weeks to land, which is far too slow.

A lot of the terminology in this video is Meta specific. If you're more used to GitHub:
- Diff review = Pull request
- Diff = Commit

Related resources:
- ["How to give better code reviews without full business context?"](https://www.jointaro.com/question/vio35mw1SYWM8AYojB2w/how-to-give-better-code-reviews-without-full-business-context/)
- ["How to review code in another language/ from another team?"](https://www.jointaro.com/question/B79W3aWc8xMB8cCULFdJ/how-to-review-code-in-another-language-from-another-team/)
- [Presentation Slides](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1koyIR9K_CtESD7Vnh3GQOE-svFW-ngrQeEAduSAoH0w/edit)