The Quiet Joy of Code Reviews

Allow me to propose a radical notion: code reviews can be a source of genuine camaraderie and delight. Yes, you read that right—these seemingly pedestrian exercises in reading each other’s code, making comments, and occasionally bantering about brace styles or variable names can, in fact, offer a rare opportunity for growth, learning, and the forging of real developer-to-developer connection¹.

Now, to be sure, many of us came up in workplaces where code reviews were mandated in about the same spirit as mandatory flossing: a small annoyance we’re told is in everyone’s best interest. A chore, basically. And sure, if you’re forced to pore through 3,000-line diffs with all the excitement of reading a phone book from the 1990s, “joy” might sound like hyperbole. But at their best, code reviews are a chance for us to momentarily step into each other’s mental worlds. Like opening up a colleague’s brain and seeing how they problem-solve, how they structure ideas, how they dance around edge cases. And there’s something quietly mesmerizing about that if you’re open to it.

Learning in Plain Sight

One of the sneaky benefits is the learning factor. When you read someone else’s code, you glimpse new patterns or libraries that you might never have encountered otherwise. Maybe you see a cunning one-liner that elegantly handles a tricky date manipulation or a data structure so intuitive it makes you question your entire approach. Sometimes you learn from them; sometimes you realize, “Oh wow, I actually know a simpler method.” Either way, knowledge gets circulated, so the project itself becomes richer and more consistent².

In a sense, code reviews democratize expertise. The senior developer can show a junior how to sidestep a performance pitfall, but the junior can also question a stale pattern that’s simply gone unchallenged for years. The interplay of different perspectives fosters a shared codebase that’s not just your code or my code—it’s ours.

The Affirmation Factor

We often think of code reviews as a place for critiquing what’s wrong. But truly uplifting code reviews make space for praising what’s right, too: “Hey, this is elegant!” or “I love how you named this function, it’s so clear!” These small affirmations can carry real weight. Software development is often a solitary journey through labyrinthine logic. Having someone notice that you cleverly handled a corner case can make your day. Even a simple thumbs-up or “Nice approach” helps build team morale.

Yes, we rely on pair programming or stand-ups for interpersonal feedback, but there’s something special about seeing that positive note appear right in the code review. It’s like a gold star on your homework assignment, except the stakes are higher, and the satisfaction is deeper.

A Window into Intent

Another underappreciated virtue: code reviews let us observe intent. Documentation can lag behind. Comments can be missing or misleading. In a code review, though, the developer often explains why they did it this way: “I did X because Y caused performance hits in the staging environment,” or “We have to sanitize this input here because user data might be in unexpected formats.”

This context can be invaluable. Future maintainers—who might be you, ironically enough—will see that context in the review history. It’s not just “what changed,” it’s why. So next time you wonder, “What fool wrote this bizarre hack?” you can check the review and maybe discover, “Oh, that fool had a good reason: a rare bug that only showed up for Japanese-language users on certain browsers.” Now, it’s less a random hack and more a thoughtful workaround³.

Fostering Trust

It’s no secret that trust is a cornerstone of successful teams. When code reviews are done well—meaning folks approach them with humility, curiosity, and genuine respect—they can massively amplify that trust. You see that your colleagues care enough to look out for pitfalls. They see that you’re receptive to feedback, not defensive or snarky. Over time, these micro-interactions accumulate into a sense of safety: “I can merge code with confidence because I know at least one other person has walked through it with me, step by step.”

Contrast that with the dreaded rubber-stamp approach: The “LGTM” comment posted after a 10-second skim. Sure, it speeds up merges, but it also fosters cynicism. Everyone starts thinking, “Nobody actually looks at my changes.” When that happens, you lose the deeper meaning of code review—collaboration, shared wisdom, the intangible bond that forms when people truly work together, not just side-by-side.

The Pragmatic Side

Of course, code reviews also serve a practical function: they help catch bugs before they escape into the production wild. They enforce coding standards, keep architecture consistent, and ensure you don’t accidentally slip in any console.log("Hello, production!") lines that might cause embarrassment. But these pragmatic benefits are well-known. What’s less discussed is how code reviews can be a wellspring of personal and collective satisfaction.

They can be so much more than gatekeeping or a cursory sign-off. They’re a moment to connect, to appreciate each other’s efforts, to teach and be taught. Yes, it might cost a bit of time up front, but the payoff is code that’s more robust and teams that are more cohesive.

A Little Bit of Ritual

One technique that can transform code reviews from dreary to cheerful is to treat them with a touch of ritual. Maybe your team can have a weekly “Review Party” (virtual or in-person) with coffee or snacks. People gather, share screens, gently discuss the code, celebrate small wins, keep an eye out for tricky bits, and collectively refine everything. This feels different—more open, less transactional—than just coldly firing off a Slack DM that says, “Please review, thanks.”

It also helps if your team sets some guardrails, like maximum recommended diff sizes (so no single review is too intimidating), or a standard approach to labeling feedback. Some folks like to mark minor style notes differently from major architectural concerns, so it’s clear which comments are merely optional suggestions. These small structures can make the code review experience more humane, more approachable.

Wrapping Up on a High Note

It’s not every day you hear someone wax poetic about code reviews. In many corners of the industry, it remains a chore to get through before merging. But if you’re willing to shift your perspective just a bit, you might find these reviews can be not only enlightening but downright enjoyable—an underutilized source of professional satisfaction.

By choosing to see code reviews as a collaborative, trust-building exercise that helps everyone learn and grow, you can elevate it from “ugh, another review request in my inbox” to something that actually puts a smile on your face. And in a field where the day-to-day can be filled with stressful deadlines and shifting project requirements, discovering small pockets of joy is worth its weight in gold. So the next time you open that review, take a minute, read carefully, ask sincere questions, throw in a genuine compliment, and watch how it transforms not only the code but the entire team dynamic.

---

Footnotes

1. The part where you and your colleague both realize you’re bizarrely obsessed with naming conventions, but bond over it anyway.
2. And, sure, maybe you let slip a few new keyboard shortcuts that elevate your colleague’s daily workflow. Minimal overhead, maximum bragging rights.
3. Granted, it’s still a hack, but a justified hack. That difference can preserve one’s sanity.

© Alexander Cannon. May all your diffs be small, and your reviews illuminating.