Our Code Review Process: Ensuring Quality at Every Step

Every line of code we write for clients goes through rigorous review. It's not just about catching bugs—it's about ensuring maintainability, security, and performance. Here's exactly how our code review process works.

Why Code Reviews Matter

Code reviews aren't bureaucracy—they're quality assurance:

• Bug Prevention: Catch issues before they reach production
• Knowledge Sharing: Team members learn from each other
• Consistency: Maintain coding standards across the project
• Security: Identify vulnerabilities early
• Maintainability: Code others can understand and modify

Our Review Process

Step 1: Developer Self-Review

Before submitting for review, developers check:

• Code compiles and passes all tests
• No console.log or debug statements left
• Self-documented with clear naming
• Follows project coding standards
• PR description explains the "why"

Step 2: Automated Checks

Our CI/CD pipeline runs:

• Linting: ESLint for code style
• Type Checking: TypeScript compilation
• Unit Tests: Jest/Vitest test suites
• Integration Tests: API and E2E tests
• Security Scan: Dependency vulnerabilities
• Build: Ensure production build works

Step 3: Peer Review

At least one team member reviews every PR, checking:

Functionality

• Does it solve the problem correctly?
• Are edge cases handled?
• Is error handling appropriate?

Code Quality

• Is the code readable and well-organized?
• Are functions/components appropriately sized?
• Is there unnecessary complexity?
• Is there code duplication?

Performance

• Any obvious performance issues?
• Unnecessary re-renders in React?
• N+1 database queries?
• Large bundle size additions?

Security

• Input validation in place?
• No hardcoded secrets?
• Proper authentication checks?
• SQL injection prevention?
• XSS protection?

Step 4: Feedback Loop

• Reviewer leaves constructive comments
• Developer addresses feedback or discusses
• Changes are pushed and re-reviewed
• Approval required before merge

What We Look For

Naming Conventions

// Bad
const d = new Date();
const fn = (x) => x * 2;

// Good
const currentDate = new Date();
const doubleValue = (number) => number * 2;

Function Size

Functions should do one thing well. If it's over 30-40 lines, it probably needs splitting.

Error Handling

// Bad
const data = await fetch(url);

// Good
try {
  const response = await fetch(url);
  if (!response.ok) {
    throw new Error(`HTTP error: ${response.status}`);
  }
  return await response.json();
} catch (error) {
  logger.error('Failed to fetch data', { url, error });
  throw error;
}

Comments

We prefer self-documenting code, but comment when:

• Explaining "why" (not "what")
• Documenting business logic
• Warning about non-obvious behavior
• TODO items with ticket references

Review Etiquette

For Reviewers

• Be constructive, not critical
• Explain the "why" behind suggestions
• Distinguish between blockers and nice-to-haves
• Acknowledge good solutions
• Review within 24 hours

For Authors

• Keep PRs small and focused
• Write clear PR descriptions
• Don't take feedback personally
• Ask questions if feedback is unclear
• Respond to all comments

Tools We Use

• GitHub: Pull requests and reviews
• ESLint + Prettier: Code formatting
• TypeScript: Type safety
• Husky: Pre-commit hooks
• GitHub Actions: CI/CD automation

The Result

Our code review process means:

• Fewer bugs reaching production
• Consistent, maintainable codebases
• Knowledge spread across the team
• Easier onboarding for new developers
• Code you can confidently hand off

Quality isn't negotiable. Every project we deliver has been reviewed, tested, and refined. Let's discuss how our process can benefit your project.