[tdeck]

One of the main purposes of code review is to ensure that your code is understandable to other people. Good lead developers understand this. Bad ones find a way to push through their changes without review or get them rubber stamped, in my experience. Then you end up with big parts of the codebase that only the lead dev can work in productively.

[bdangubic]

the whole team has to review every single line of code to make sure everyone understands it? or is there a threshold like “we good if 7 out of 79 understand it?” almost 3 decades hacking and have never heard anyone saying that purpose of the code review (in the top 987 reasons teams may institute it) is to ensure your code is understandable by other people… wild :)

[tdeck]

This page is literally the second result when you Google "benefits of code review":

https://www.browserstack.com/guide/code-review-benefits

> Code Review enhances the maintainability of the Code. It ensures that multiple people are aware about the code logic and functioning, which makes it easy to maintain in case the original author of the code is unavailable.

The fact that you've been "hacking" for three decades and never considered this isn't something to wear as a badge of honor. As for your absurd straw man about everyone on the team reviewing every line of code, I've never seen one organization that does that.

[bdangubic]

are aware about the code logic and functioning

awareness does not imply understanding :)

[RealityVoid]

No, but it's a minimal threshold. In the end, following the same rules prevents you from doing dumb mistakes and prevents a feeling of unfairness such as OP felt. And, if you can't follow your own rules because they're too annoying, maybe you should change them. So, really, there are multiple benefits. Just follow the rules.

[bdangubic]

which rules specifically are you talking about?

[RealityVoid]

The rules of the code review that the top level OP was talking about.