A new Proposition for Software Code Review Process

Authors

  • Nandi S Department of Information Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata India
  • Dhar S School of Material Science & Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata India

Keywords:

Code Review Effectiveness, TDCE, RE, Cyclomatic Complexity, Time Complexity

Abstract

this paper provides a new theoretical approach of code review, considering its existing challenges in current software industry with upward trend in agile methodology adoption. This article captures both Process aspects and Technical aspects of Code Review. It tries to establish the importance of Ownership, Authority, and Transparency in Process. Technically this solution tries to identify most important four deciding factors in generating function vulnerability score with Red-Amber-Green criteria for all the four factors. It formulates easy steps of determining values for those four factors which are feasible to utilize in real life scenario. Also it explains process of identifying the fifth deciding factor based upon the outcome of a project’s defect prevention analysis. It explains ways of capturing review effectiveness by appropriate metric values which can be used for quantified reporting to senior management on a pre-defined interval

References

Qualiteers – Defending Software Quality, 2005 Qualiteers | info@qualiteers.com

http://www.qualiteers.com/symptom_ineffective.php

Dr. Aviel D. Rubin, Dr. Seth J. Nielson, Dr.Sam Small, Dr. Christopher K. Monson; “Guidelines for Source Code Review in Hi‐Tech Litigation”; Harbor Labs White Paper;

http://harborlabs.com/codereview.pdf

Yanqing Wang, Bo Zheng, Hujie Huang; “Complying with Coding Standards or Retaining Programming Style: A Quality Outlook at Source Code Level”;

J. Software Engineering & Applications, 2008, 1:88-91 published Online December 2008 in SciRes

“Modernizing the Peer Code Review Process”; KLOCWORK | WHITE PAPER | APRIL 2010;

“Five Types of Review”;

Pros and cons of formal, over-the-shoulder, email pass-around, pair-programming, and tool-assisted reviews

www.ccs.neu.edu/home/lieber/courses/cs4500/f07/lectures/code-review-types.pdf

Jason Cohen, Steven Teleki, Eric Brown; “Best Kept Secrets of Peer Code Review”;

Collaborator by SMARTBEAR;http://smartbear.com

Archana Srivastava, S.K.Singh and Syed Qamar Abbas;

International Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering; “Proposed Quality Paradigm for End User Development”;International Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering, Review Paper, Volume-4 Issue-4, E-ISSN: 2347-2693;

Suvra Nandi; “Quality Maintenance Effort Optimization in Software Industry”; International Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering, Case Study, Volume-4 Issue-5, E-ISSN: 2347-2693;

THOMAS J. McCABE; “A Complexity Measure”;

IEEE Transactions On Software Engineering, Vol. Se-2, No.4, December 1976;

“LIST OF SUCCESS INDICATORS AND METRICS”;

http://www.bth.se/com/mun.nsf/attachments/Metric%20examples_pdf/$file/Metric%20examples.pdf

Downloads

Published

2025-11-11

How to Cite

[1]
S. Nandi and S. Dhar, “A new Proposition for Software Code Review Process”, Int. J. Comp. Sci. Eng., vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 68–74, Nov. 2025.

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 6 (2016): IJCSE June Edition

Section

Technical Article

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors contributing to this journal agree to publish their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this license are made clear.