Why Code review as testing in Testing Fundamentals? - Purpose & Use Cases

The Big Idea

What if you could catch bugs before running a single test?

The Scenario

Imagine you have to check every line of your teammate's code by reading it slowly on paper or screen, looking for mistakes without running it.

You try to spot bugs, security holes, or confusing parts just by eyeballing the text.

The Problem

This manual reading is slow and tiring.

It's easy to miss errors because you can't see how the code behaves in real life.

Also, without a second pair of eyes, some problems stay hidden until much later.

The Solution

Code review as testing means carefully examining code changes with a testing mindset before running the program.

Reviewers look for bugs, logic errors, and unclear parts early, catching issues before they cause trouble.

This saves time and improves code quality by preventing problems upfront.

Before vs After

✗ Before

Read code line by line, guess if it works, hope no bugs.

✓ After

Review code changes with checklist, discuss issues, suggest fixes before merge.

What It Enables

It enables catching bugs early and improving code quality without waiting for full testing cycles.

Real Life Example

Before adding a new feature, a developer submits code for review.

Reviewers spot a missing check that could cause a crash.

Fixing it early prevents a costly bug in production.

Key Takeaways

Manual code reading is slow and error-prone.

Code review as testing finds bugs early by examining code carefully.

This practice improves software quality and saves time.

Practice

1. What is the main purpose of code review in software testing?

easy

A. To find bugs and improve code quality before running the code

B. To write new features faster

C. To deploy code to production immediately

D. To replace automated testing completely

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand code review purpose

   Code review is done to check code manually for errors and improvements before execution.

2. Step 2: Compare options with purpose

   Only To find bugs and improve code quality before running the code matches the goal of finding bugs and improving quality before running code.

3. Final Answer:

   To find bugs and improve code quality before running the code -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Code review = find bugs early [OK]

Hint: Code review finds bugs before running code [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Thinking code review replaces automated tests
• Believing code review speeds up deployment
• Confusing code review with coding new features

2. Which of the following is the correct way to give feedback during a code review?

easy

A. Provide clear, constructive comments with examples

B. Only comment if you find a syntax error

C. Ignore small mistakes to save time

D. Say 'This code is bad' without explanation

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand effective feedback

   Good feedback is clear, constructive, and helps improve code with examples.

2. Step 2: Evaluate options

   Provide clear, constructive comments with examples matches this approach; others are either rude, incomplete, or ignore issues.

3. Final Answer:

   Provide clear, constructive comments with examples -> Option A

4. Quick Check:

   Constructive feedback = clear + helpful [OK]

Hint: Be clear and helpful in feedback [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Giving vague or rude comments
• Ignoring minor but important issues
• Only pointing out syntax errors

3. During a code review, you see this Python snippet:

def add_numbers(a, b):
    return a + b

result = add_numbers(2, '3')
print(result)

What will happen when this code runs?

medium

A. It will print 5

B. It will print 23

C. It will raise a TypeError

D. It will print null

Solution

1. Step 1: Analyze function call with mixed types

   The function adds an integer 2 and a string '3', which is invalid in Python.

2. Step 2: Understand Python behavior on adding int and str

   Python raises a TypeError when trying to add int and str directly.

3. Final Answer:

   It will raise a TypeError -> Option C

4. Quick Check:

   int + str = TypeError [OK]

Hint: Adding int and string causes TypeError in Python [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Assuming Python converts string to int automatically
• Thinking it concatenates as strings
• Expecting numeric addition without error

4. You find this JavaScript code during review:

function multiply(x, y) {
  return x * y;
}

console.log(multiply(5));

What is the issue and how to fix it?

medium

A. multiply is missing one argument; fix by passing two arguments

B. multiply returns NaN; fix by setting default value for y

C. No issue; it prints 5

D. multiply throws error; fix by wrapping in try-catch

Solution

1. Step 1: Check function call with missing argument

   Calling multiply(5) passes only one argument; y is undefined.

2. Step 2: Understand JavaScript behavior multiplying number and undefined

   Multiplying number by undefined results in NaN (Not a Number).

3. Step 3: Fix by setting default value for y

   Use default parameter like function multiply(x, y = 1) to avoid NaN.

4. Final Answer:

   multiply returns NaN; fix by setting default value for y -> Option B

5. Quick Check:

   Missing arg causes NaN; default fixes [OK]

Hint: Missing JS args can cause NaN; use defaults [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Assuming missing argument is zero
• Expecting error instead of NaN
• Ignoring default parameter usage

5. You review this Python code snippet:

data = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
result = {x: x*2 for x in data if x > 2}
result[3] = 10
print(result)

What is the final output and what does it teach about code review?

hard

A. {3: 6, 4: 8, 5: 10} - Code review helps spot logic and mutation issues

B. {1: 2, 2: 4, 3: 6, 4: 8, 5: 10} - Code review ensures all data processed

C. Error - Code review prevents runtime exceptions

D. {3: 10, 4: 8, 5: 10} - Code review helps catch unintended data changes

Solution

1. Step 1: Understand dictionary comprehension with condition

   Creates dict with keys 3,4,5 and values doubled: {3:6,4:8,5:10}.

2. Step 2: Note mutation of result[3]

   Code changes key 3's value from 6 to 10 explicitly.

3. Step 3: Final output and lesson

   Prints {3:10,4:8,5:10}. Code review helps catch such unintended mutations.

4. Final Answer:

   {3: 10, 4: 8, 5: 10} - Code review helps catch unintended data changes -> Option D

5. Quick Check:

   Mutation changes dict; review catches it [OK]

Hint: Check data changes carefully during review [OK]

Common Mistakes:

• Ignoring dictionary mutation after comprehension
• Assuming all data keys included
• Expecting error instead of changed output