When it comes to code reviews, are you guiding or just gatekeeping?
This question gets to the heart of a mature engineering culture. On the surface, code reviews are a technical checkpoint. They catch mistakes, ensure best practices are followed, and are often a mandatory step for security compliances like SOC2. But performing them well elevates the entire team. Their true power lies in their potential for mentorship and shared growth.
The best reviewers act as teachers, not tollbooth operators. This is a learned skill that requires a balanced approach, knowing when to ask guiding questions and when to provide direct, informative answers.
The Adaptive Approach: Knowing When to Nudge vs. Inform
A skilled reviewer adapts their feedback to the situation and the individual. Let's break down two common scenarios and the most effective way to handle each.
Inefficient Solutioning
Imagine a developer submits code that uses multiple loops to iterate through the same dataset where a single, more efficient loop would suffice. This could be a simple oversight, or they might genuinely believe it's the only way to accomplish the task.
- ❌ Ineffective Response: Leaving a direct command like, "This is wrong, do it in one loop." This can feel critical and doesn't foster learning.
- ✅ Effective "Nudge": Asking a guiding question that empowers the author.
"I see we're looping through the same data a few times. Are there ways we could accomplish this in a single iteration?"
This Socratic method is powerful for two reasons. If it's just an oversight, this gives them the opportunity to correct it themselves without negativity. If it's a genuine knowledge gap, this guides them to discover a better solution, expanding their skills organically in the process. It respects their ability to solve the problem while pointing them in a more optimal direction.
Easily Optimized Code
Now, consider a simpler case. A developer uses a basic null check where a stricter, more modern type check would prevent a whole class of future bugs.
- ❌ Ineffective Response: Asking a vague question like, "Is there something better here?" This can be frustrating, especially for a more junior developer who may not know what you're hinting at.
- ✅ Effective "Informative Suggestion": Being direct while providing the crucial context.
"This works, but if you use
[stricter check]here instead, the types will be enforced, which can prevent potential problems with[system or feature]down the road. It's a safer and more concise pattern."
Here, the goal is a direct, simple improvement. A guiding question isn't necessary and can slow things down. Providing a clear suggestion along with the valuable "why" is efficient, educational, and shows respect for the developer's time.
Building a Stronger Team, One Review at a Time
An informative, context-rich approach to code reviews builds a culture of shared knowledge, psychological safety, and trust. Taking the time to guide and inform, rather than simply instructing, is how you collectively improve your codebase and your team's capabilities. This investment in mentorship ultimately leads to accelerated velocity, higher quality, and a stronger, more resilient engineering organization.