[goblin89]

IMO any overly clever code would remind of obfuscation. The trick is to notice in time your own attempts at being smart and refrain. Thus the code could communicate most of the things that needed to be explained in this walkthrough.

That's also why I personally am not very enthusiastic about such code reviews. Good code would seem boring, and why study bad code?

[pekk]

Aren't code reviews normally meant to highlight which parts are good and which are bad?

[goblin89]

Not in this case, though—OP just explains what does the code do, without any opinion.

[atomical]

So you become a better programmer?

[goblin89]

Fair enough, maybe it would work for someone. I find that reading and especially writing code of certain style shapes my style accordingly, similar to how our environment influences us, so I'd rather learn by working with good code—but it's just me.

[atomical]

Code reviews are about finding (1) the proper way to do things (2) edge cases, bugs, and the right architecture. Code reviews are not academic at all. They do require someone with a lot of experience.