Code Review English: Giving and Receiving Feedback Professionally
5 exercises — requesting changes diplomatically, explaining why a change is needed, acknowledging good code, asking clarifying questions, and responding to review comments professionally.
0 / 5 completed
1 / 5
You are reviewing a PR and need to request a change to how errors are handled. Which comment is MOST constructive?
Requesting changes diplomatically: Use 'Consider...' or 'What do you think about...' rather than directives. Explain the specific problem (silent error swallowing), the consequence (caller doesn't know), and suggest a concrete solution (code example). Option B does all three. This is the 'Conventional Comments' approach widely used in professional code review.
2 / 5
You need to explain WHY a specific change is needed in a code review. Which explanation is BEST?
Explaining the 'why' behind a requested change dramatically improves the quality of code review. Option B gives the specific reason (12 references = single source of truth), the maintainability benefit (one-line future change), and the risk avoided (inconsistency from multi-place edits). This helps the author understand the principle, not just make the mechanical change.
3 / 5
You want to acknowledge good work in a code review. Which comment is MOST specific and useful?
Acknowledging good code: Specific positive feedback ('using a generator function to lazily evaluate') is more valuable than generic praise ('LGTM', 'good job'). Naming what is good and why it is good reinforces the pattern, helps the author know what to replicate, and creates a learning culture. LGTM is fine for routine approvals but misses a teaching opportunity.
4 / 5
You don't understand why a particular design decision was made in a PR. Which clarifying question is MOST professional?
Clarifying questions in code review: Frame questions as genuine curiosity rather than implicit criticism. Acknowledge the possible reason ('was there a specific constraint') and leave room for the decision to be correct ('or is this worth revisiting'). Option B is collaborative and non-confrontational. Option D is too blunt; Option A sounds accusatory.
5 / 5
A reviewer has left a comment suggesting you use a different data structure. You disagree but want to respond professionally. Which response is BEST?
Responding to review comments professionally: Acknowledge the suggestion, explain your reasoning with specifics, and leave the door open to being wrong ('I'm open to switching'). Option B demonstrates that you considered the alternative, gives a clear technical reason for your choice, and invites further discussion. This is collaborative disagreement — the hallmark of a strong engineering culture.