Code Reviews as Information Radiators
I tend to speak of them as part of an overarching quality strategy. This is true but what gets lost or assumed is the viewpoint that having a code review predominately affects quality through the finding of mistakes and gotchas. This is valuable, surely.
What’s even more valuable is the information disbursed and knowledge sharing gained by the team reviewing other’s code. Let’s face it; code review tends to find little bugs and stuff that linters can handle. The big bugs and misses are rarely caught in manual static analysis.
Repeated exposure to the code base and our teams' way of thinking is what’s driving the quality value prop. Reviewing merge requests and diffs can be illuminating and I recommend it for every member of the implementation team. We get a broader view, holistic thinking, banishing shallow agreements and ambiguities.