一句话：通过文献、访谈与工具实验，识别影响代码变更可审查性的关键因素并给出建议。
同行代码审查中，代码变更在合并或上线前由作者之外的开发者人工检查，但学界与业界对“可审查性”的系统理解仍不足。本文旨在回答哪些因素让代码变更更容易被审查。作者调研了学术文献与灰色文献（博客、白皮书），访谈了十名职业开发者，并设计部署了一个可审查性评估工具，由职业开发者对98个代码变更进行评分。研究发现，可审查性由多个因素共同定义，包括变更描述、变更规模以及连贯的提交历史等。基于此，论文为实践者和研究者提供了改进代码审查流程与后续研究方向的建议。
Peer code review is a practice widely adopted in software projects to improve the quality of code. In current code review practices, code changes are manually inspected by developers other than the author before these changes are integrated into a project or put into production. We conducted a study to obtain an empirical understanding of what makes a code change easier to review. To this end, we surveyed published academic literature and sources from gray literature (blogs and white papers), we interviewed ten professional developers, and we designed and deployed a reviewability evaluation tool that professional developers used to rate the reviewability of 98 changes. We find that reviewability is defined through several factors, such as the change description, size, and coherent commit history. We provide recommendations for practitioners and researchers. Public preprint [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1323659]; data and materials [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1323659].
DOI 原文 ·
@inproceedings{paperbot4617,
title = {What makes a code change easier to review: an empirical investigation on code change reviewability},
author = {Achyudh Ram and Anand Ashok Sawant and Marco Castelluccio and Alberto Bacchelli},
booktitle = {FSE},
year = {2018},
doi = {10.1145/3236024.3236080}
}