[ashishuthama]

A new engineer can learn a lot from being on code reviews earlyon. Anything from the team coding style to the application architecture.

[jolmg]

A reviewer is not there to learn. If anything, they're there to teach. What good is a reviewer that can't grade others on their adherence to the coding style and application architecture of the project? They're supposed to determine what goes in or not.

[wolco]

They wouldn't be the only one reviewing or reviewing at all. It would help them understand the process if they see it in action.

[stevens32]

Reviewers not willing to learn anything during a code review is probably an easy tell for a crappy code review culture

[jolmg]

This discussion is about newcomers that know basically nothing of the project. When I say they're not there to learn, I mean their primary function as reviewers isn't to learn from what gets submitted. They can learn depending on what gets submitted, but if 90% of the time their ignorance doesn't permit them to properly determine if what's submitted to them is good or not, then what's the point of their review?