Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
3 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
If it's so large that you must link the repo rather than reposting code, I think it is too large to reasonably expect anyone to review. Bored people will read a couple dozen lines, and point out a thing or two. But nobody (?) is bored enough to audit 1k+ LoC just for the asking.
I personally would like to see reviews of individual PRs focused around a specific goal. It is already good practice for a PR to be focused, which helps reviewers understand what sort of feedback specifically you are looking for.
The problem here is that if you start posting your PRs on the code review site, there's not much left to discuss in the Codidact post. All discussion would naturally go into the PR page. For example, Github has a great interface for commenting on individual lines, and instead of using that, posting a bunch of permalink in your Codidact answer seems silly. But then again, it saves you from creating/logging in to a Github account, and you get Codidact rep for it. I've also used exactly that approach many times in the past over Email or IM because it's sometimes easier to have a dialogue that way than over Github comments.
Re: concern about linkrot, it is possible to extract a PR in a unified patch format and duplicate it on Codidact. Although, for Github specifically, the concern seems silly to me. Github is not like some random wordpress blog, their links are not going to rot. Github spent over a decade working very hard to develop a system that ensures that.
So how do the powers-that-be feel about allowing PR review request in the Code Review section? It would be a good way to boost activity and give knowledgeable people a good reason to use the site.
0 comment threads
Welcome!
It's best if the code being reviewed is here on the site, for ease of reference and defense against link rot. That sounds like a sizable program; are there key parts you'd like review on, as opposed to the whole thing? You could include the GitHub link for anybody who wants to run it as part of the review, but most of our code reviews have focused on smaller pieces. The various utility methods, accessors, etc probably aren't the interesting part, right? Also, if you focus on the most important parts, you're more likely to get good feedback from reviewers, as you'll make it easy for them to skip the routine stuff and focus on the meat.
Total noob here and noob to this site. I've written a non-trivial program in Python.
I'm the only one who see contradiction here? Anyway, posting link to GitHub repo is absolutely appropriate. Moreover I'd say this is the best way for something that is more than 100 lines of code.
One can write an answer with explanations and also open PR with suggestions. You don't have to merge it but I believe it would be easier for you to understand feedback this way. At least that's how I usually do code-review from communities like this one when link to github repo is available.
0 comment threads