Stefan Priebsch, Arne Blankerts, Sebastian Bergmann (26.Sep.2009)
Talk at CodeWorks 2009 (Dallas) (English - US)
In this workshop, three PHP experts with different software engineering focuses (testing, architecture, and security) willperform an interactive code review together with the audience.Using examples from Open Source projects, attendees of thisworkshop learn how experts look at code, what tools they use during code reviews, what good code and bad code looks like,and how to avoid the most common gotchas. They are invited to bring their own code for an anonymous code review for anincreased benefit from the workshop.Each of the three PHP experts involved in this workshop will present an in-depth workshopfor their particular area of expertise in the afternoon that builds upon this one.
Quicklink: https://joind.in/704
By clicking this button you are declaring that you are the speaker responsible for it and a claim request will be sent to the administrator of the event.
If the claim is approved you will be able to edit the information for this talk.
Are you sure?
27.Sep.2009 at 14:08 by Cooper Sellers
Enjoyed the presentation. I would have preferred a little less sarcasm.
I will echo what MonkeyT said about how did you reach the code fragments that were presented, unless of course it was more just going file by file, line by line.
Thank you for the presentation!
30.Sep.2009 at 14:28 by Jake Smith
The presentation was great, and I enjoyed the interaction with the group. Being able to review local developers code was also great.
Know of an event happening? Let us know! We love to get the word out about events the community would be interested in and you can help us spread the word!
Claiming a talk you let us know that you were the speaker for it. When you claim it (and it's approved by the event admins) it will be linked to your account.
You'll also receive emails when new comments are posted to it.
27.Sep.2009 at 10:59 by Tim Stiles
Very good presentation with good examples of the detailed code problems that can be reworked to salvage badly written apps. I would like to see more emphasis on the process that narrows down the prospective trouble areas: the leap from the initial line count / statistics report directly to the direct nosebleed-detail level examination of the code seems to be a pretty broad gap to cross in a single, mostly intuitive step. In other words, after your initial scan of a project, please elaborate more on how you identify which aspects of the code are likely to deserve your initial focus rather than leaping directly into the problem examples themselves.
I enjoyed the talk very much. Thanks!