This week in my open source class we had the opportunity to review classmates source code.
I did really well at not peaking and seeing other classmates code for the release0.1. However, this proved to be a weaker strategy. I ran into more issues by not reading about the issues and difficulties my peers faced. For example, I approached the CLI options completely differently than everyone else. Had I put myself forward and opened a discussion - i believe I would have saved much more time, and created better code to support the feature.
Reviewing my peers code was very interesting. There were similarities and differences in how we approached the task, coded, and used logic. Some of the issues with the program were already shared with me by the author. This made me realize that my peer had already tested their program thoroughly and were working towards fixing their issues. I went ahead and forked, cloned, and ran the program anyways.
I reviewed the code and noticed a lot of commented code - similar to mine. The comments were mainly console.logs to save the date and provide actual feedback to what was happening.
I went ahead and made an issue about this. I also submitted one about the readme which had some typos and could be refined. They can be found here:
I got reviewed by the same peer, and I had actually only posted a skeleton of my work. As you will see from my other blog... I had difficulties deciding an approach. Therefore many of the issues were actually resolved.
The whole process of reviewing was fairly fun as I was able to analyze and provide feedback where my code had strengths, but I also got feedback on where my code had weaknesses. This was a nice because there were some things that I actually did not take notice of. For a while I forgot to implement the output of an actual html file. I got worked up on the additional features - so seeing the issue there that there was no actual output reminded me!