Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

engineercodex.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 302 posts

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#251

Post by redditor98654 »

withinboredom wrote: post #233
Arainach wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked with some amazing engineers, including multiple whose blog posts regularly get posted here. None of them have egos or consider code review feedback personal attacks. It's not like you're being told to never use for loops. Code review feedback such as the following is all objective, beneficial to the reader, and not worth pushing back against: * This logic should live in [other component] * Our RPCs are na…

> If anyone on my team ever described themselves as in "a war of attrition" with another teammate I'd fire them. I wasn't sure if I was going to reply to this part or not. But you took a comment out of context here. I'm incredibly touchy about code reviews. I used to have the popular opinion here where "the code belongs to the team!" and all that. And then I was stuck on a team with a very toxic guy who weaponized th…

You experience one extreme ans then decided to take the opposite extreme stance. I recommend being more pragmatic.

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#252

Post by selcuka »

stavros wrote: post #247
mstachowiak wrote: post #200

Shameless plug - I'm one of the creators of GitContext ( https://gitcontext.com ), a code review tool which has drawn much inspiration from Critique and others, and would love feedback from anyone who's interested in kicking the tires. We just launched in private alpha. We're putting a maniacal focus into the user experience of code reviews, which we feel is overlooked by most tools. Many of the features of Critique…

I'll say what I said downthread to someone who made something similar: This costs more than twice as much as GitHub, does it provide twice the value?

> This costs more than twice as much as GitHub, does it provide twice the value?

This is not always the right question to ask. One can argue that both products are too cheap with respect to the value they offer, so the relative value between the two is irrelevant.

In other words, if you can afford $X and $2X without even thinking, and if you think even $10X would be a fair value for either, it doesn't matter if the $2X product offers only 20% more value. You would simply want to get the best, even if it's a diminishing return. I believe $9/month/developer can be classified in this category if you are actually doing code reviews.

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#253

Post by withinboredom »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #227
withinboredom wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a such thing as “bad code” but not low quality code. Bad code can be detected by automated tooling and be improved through simple refactoring.

I'd say it this way: bad code doesn't robustly handle all the use cases, mis-interprets inputs sometimes, or is a mess to read and debug. Yes, it matters what the code looks like. Knew a guy, named everything in his code a letter of the alphabet. a,b,c and when he got to z started za, zb etc. That was 'bad code'. Or, it was 'Low Quality Code'. Nobody wants junk like that. Even if it passes tests, is robust etc.

> Nobody wants junk like that.

I can think of a few tools that do that to your PHP or JS code, on purpose. They even cost quite a bit of money (obfuscation). Sounds like you might have gotten a good deal there ... /s

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#254

Post by spartanatreyu »

mstachowiak wrote: post #200

Shameless plug - I'm one of the creators of GitContext ( https://gitcontext.com ), a code review tool which has drawn much inspiration from Critique and others, and would love feedback from anyone who's interested in kicking the tires. We just launched in private alpha. We're putting a maniacal focus into the user experience of code reviews, which we feel is overlooked by most tools. Many of the features of Critique…

Something is going horribly wrong on this page.

Putting an svg filter over the video element is making the page render 1fps a second on Firefox MacOS.

I legitimately thought you uploaded a massive gif as your feature asset instead of a video.

If the effect is always on the video, you may want to just bake it into the video.

Otherwise, you might want to recreate the filter without using SVGs to do it.

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#255

Post by mplanchard »

mstachowiak wrote: post #245
mplanchard wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a desktop app? If so, is it cross-platform? I couldn’t find this info anywhere on your site.

Sorry for the confusion. It's currently only offered as a web application and only works with GitHub. We are working to expand beyond these limitations based on customer needs / interest. I assume your interest is in a desktop application?

I was just wondering! I'm on Linux, so I wasn't sure on reading the web page whether it was something I'd be able to run, and the screenshots looked more desktop-app than web-app.

We use GitLab at work, so I wouldn't be able to use it there, but I use GitHub and sourcehut for some personal and open source stuff. Code review is one of the few things I don't do in emacs, so there remains room for other tools :)

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#256

Post by codeapprove »

stavros wrote: post #246
codeapprove wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was on a team at Google that used both Critique and GitHub very heavily, so I was able to constantly see the side-by-side and understand the pain engineers faced when doing external code reviews (as a whole, people actually liked working on GitHub). After I left I created CodeApprove ( https://codeapprove.com ) to bring a lot of Google's best code review practices to GitHub. It doesn't give you everything Critique…

This looks like a good tool, and I was tempted to try it, but it costs twice as much as GitHub itself, and I'm not sure it would give us twice as much value.

Honestly that’s fair because GitHub is very good and probably too cheap. If they doubled their prices tomorrow I wouldn’t even consider leaving.

What would you pay for CodeApprove? Also if you email me I’m happy to set you up with a 6-month free trial with no credit card required. Maybe you’ll like it more than you think!

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#257

Post by withinboredom »

redditor98654 wrote: post #251
withinboredom wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If anyone on my team ever described themselves as in "a war of attrition" with another teammate I'd fire them. I wasn't sure if I was going to reply to this part or not. But you took a comment out of context here. I'm incredibly touchy about code reviews. I used to have the popular opinion here where "the code belongs to the team!" and all that. And then I was stuck on a team with a very toxic guy who weaponized th…

You experience one extreme ans then decided to take the opposite extreme stance. I recommend being more pragmatic.

Eventually, sure.

I'm also starting to think this is how the Paradox of Tolerance happens. I'm intolerant of intolerance these days. I'm much more tolerant of people having their way of doing things than I was just 10 years ago. However, as soon as one person comes along and says "It MUST be this way because QUALITY!" I go into intolerance mode and don't tolerate it.

Now, if you can give me a reason grounded in computer science, or whatever paradigm we're using (DDD, hexagonal arch, actor-model, etc), then I'm perfectly happy to agree or spend a few minutes over a coffee discussing merits. But if the reason is 'quality' ... it's a "dual to the death."

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#258

Post by mplanchard »

spartanatreyu wrote: post #254
mstachowiak wrote: post #200

Shameless plug - I'm one of the creators of GitContext ( https://gitcontext.com ), a code review tool which has drawn much inspiration from Critique and others, and would love feedback from anyone who's interested in kicking the tires. We just launched in private alpha. We're putting a maniacal focus into the user experience of code reviews, which we feel is overlooked by most tools. Many of the features of Critique…

Something is going horribly wrong on this page. Putting an svg filter over the video element is making the page render 1fps a second on Firefox MacOS. I legitimately thought you uploaded a massive gif as your feature asset instead of a video. If the effect is always on the video, you may want to just bake it into the video. Otherwise, you might want to recreate the filter without using SVGs to do it.

I have the same problem on Firefox on Linux. It is also extremely heavy on Firefox for iOS, causes the phone to heat up.

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#259

Post by mstachowiak »

spartanatreyu wrote: post #254
mstachowiak wrote: post #200

Shameless plug - I'm one of the creators of GitContext ( https://gitcontext.com ), a code review tool which has drawn much inspiration from Critique and others, and would love feedback from anyone who's interested in kicking the tires. We just launched in private alpha. We're putting a maniacal focus into the user experience of code reviews, which we feel is overlooked by most tools. Many of the features of Critique…

Something is going horribly wrong on this page. Putting an svg filter over the video element is making the page render 1fps a second on Firefox MacOS. I legitimately thought you uploaded a massive gif as your feature asset instead of a video. If the effect is always on the video, you may want to just bake it into the video. Otherwise, you might want to recreate the filter without using SVGs to do it.

Thanks for highlighting, we're investigating and should have a fix shortly.

Re: A study of Google's code review tooling (Critique)

#260

Post by mstachowiak »

stavros wrote: post #247
mstachowiak wrote: post #200

Shameless plug - I'm one of the creators of GitContext ( https://gitcontext.com ), a code review tool which has drawn much inspiration from Critique and others, and would love feedback from anyone who's interested in kicking the tires. We just launched in private alpha. We're putting a maniacal focus into the user experience of code reviews, which we feel is overlooked by most tools. Many of the features of Critique…

I'll say what I said downthread to someone who made something similar: This costs more than twice as much as GitHub, does it provide twice the value?

Fair question. We're aiming to provide enough value for the price we'll ultimate target. We aren't charging yet, but wanted to provide people with some of our rough thoughts on pricing since it's a common question. For now, it's free for folks who want to kick the tires.
Post reply on HN