Code Review Comprehension: Reviewing Strategies Seen Through Code Comprehension Theories
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21455v1
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 12:44:40 GMT
- Title: Code Review Comprehension: Reviewing Strategies Seen Through Code Comprehension Theories
- Authors: Pavlína Wurzel Gonçalves, Pooja Rani, Margaret-Anne Storey, Diomidis Spinellis, Alberto Bacchelli,
- Abstract summary: We observed and interviewed ten experienced reviewers while they performed 25 code reviews from their review queue.<n>Using Letovsky's model of code comprehension, we performed a theory-driven thematic analysis.<n>Our findings confirm that code comprehension is fundamental to code review.
- Score: 12.81041154115436
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: Despite the popularity and importance of modern code review, the understanding of the cognitive processes that enable reviewers to analyze code and provide meaningful feedback is lacking. To address this gap, we observed and interviewed ten experienced reviewers while they performed 25 code reviews from their review queue. Since comprehending code changes is essential to perform code review and the primary challenge for reviewers, we focused our analysis on this cognitive process. Using Letovsky's model of code comprehension, we performed a theory-driven thematic analysis to investigate how reviewers apply code comprehension to navigate changes and provide feedback. Our findings confirm that code comprehension is fundamental to code review. We extend Letovsky's model to propose the Code Review Comprehension Model and demonstrate that code review, like code comprehension, relies on opportunistic strategies. These strategies typically begin with a context-building phase, followed by code inspection involving code reading, testing, and discussion management. To interpret and evaluate the proposed change, reviewers construct a mental model of the change as an extension of their understanding of the overall software system and contrast mental representations of expected and ideal solutions against the actual implementation. Based on our findings, we discuss how review tools and practices can better support reviewers in employing their strategies and in forming understanding. Data and material: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14748996
Related papers
- Identifying Aspects in Peer Reviews [61.374437855024844]
We develop a data-driven schema for deriving fine-grained aspects from a corpus of peer reviews.
We introduce a dataset of peer reviews augmented with aspects and show how it can be used for community-level review analysis.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-09T14:14:42Z) - CodeCriticBench: A Holistic Code Critique Benchmark for Large Language Models [97.18215355266143]
We introduce a holistic code critique benchmark for Large Language Models (LLMs) called CodeCriticBench.<n>Specifically, our CodeCriticBench includes two mainstream code tasks (i.e., code generation and code QA) with different difficulties.<n>Besides, the evaluation protocols include basic critique evaluation and advanced critique evaluation for different characteristics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-23T15:36:43Z) - Understanding Code Understandability Improvements in Code Reviews [79.16476505761582]
We analyzed 2,401 code review comments from Java open-source projects on GitHub.
83.9% of suggestions for improvement were accepted and integrated, with fewer than 1% later reverted.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-29T12:21:23Z) - Towards debiasing code review support [1.188383832081829]
This paper explores harmful cases caused by cognitive biases during code review.
In particular, we design prototypes covering confirmation bias and decision fatigue.
We show that some techniques could be implemented in existing code review tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-01T15:58:14Z) - Demystifying Code Snippets in Code Reviews: A Study of the OpenStack and Qt Communities and A Practitioner Survey [6.091233191627442]
We conduct a mixed-methods study to mine information and knowledge related to code snippets in code reviews.
The study results highlight that reviewers can provide code snippets in appropriate scenarios to meet developers' specific information needs in code reviews.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-26T17:49:19Z) - Exploring the Advances in Identifying Useful Code Review Comments [0.0]
This paper reflects the evolution of research on the usefulness of code review comments.
It examines papers that define the usefulness of code review comments, mine and annotate datasets, study developers' perceptions, analyze factors from different aspects, and use machine learning classifiers to automatically predict the usefulness of code review comments.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-03T00:41:20Z) - CodeReviewer: Pre-Training for Automating Code Review Activities [36.40557768557425]
This research focuses on utilizing pre-training techniques for the tasks in the code review scenario.
We collect a large-scale dataset of real world code changes and code reviews from open-source projects in nine of the most popular programming languages.
To better understand code diffs and reviews, we propose CodeReviewer, a pre-trained model that utilizes four pre-training tasks tailored specifically for the code review senario.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-03-17T05:40:13Z) - Predicting Code Review Completion Time in Modern Code Review [12.696276129130332]
Modern Code Review (MCR) is being adopted in both open source and commercial projects as a common practice.
Code reviews can experience significant delays to be completed due to various socio-technical factors.
There is a lack of tool support to help developers estimating the time required to complete a code review.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-30T14:00:56Z) - Deep Just-In-Time Inconsistency Detection Between Comments and Source
Code [51.00904399653609]
In this paper, we aim to detect whether a comment becomes inconsistent as a result of changes to the corresponding body of code.
We develop a deep-learning approach that learns to correlate a comment with code changes.
We show the usefulness of our approach by combining it with a comment update model to build a more comprehensive automatic comment maintenance system.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-04T16:49:28Z) - A Unified Dual-view Model for Review Summarization and Sentiment
Classification with Inconsistency Loss [51.448615489097236]
Acquiring accurate summarization and sentiment from user reviews is an essential component of modern e-commerce platforms.
We propose a novel dual-view model that jointly improves the performance of these two tasks.
Experiment results on four real-world datasets from different domains demonstrate the effectiveness of our model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-02T13:34:11Z) - Code Review in the Classroom [57.300604527924015]
Young developers in a classroom setting provide a clear picture of the potential favourable and problematic areas of the code review process.
Their feedback suggests that the process has been well received with some points to better the process.
This paper can be used as guidelines to perform code reviews in the classroom.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-19T06:07:45Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.