Most people outside tech assume code review is just a final approval step before something goes live. In reality, it’s one of the most important quality filters in the entire development process. When another developer reviews your code, they’re not just checking for mistakes. They’re questioning logic, testing edge cases, and making sure the solution truly holds up beyond "it works on my system." That second perspective catches small problems early, before they grow into expensive issues later.
But the real value of code review isn’t just bug detection but the conversation it forces. Why was this approach chosen? Is there a simpler or more scalable way? Are we thinking short term or long term? These discussions sharpen technical decisions and prevent silent assumptions from slipping into the product.
Teams that skip reviews may feel faster in the moment, but they usually pay for it later through instability and technical debt. Code review provides structured collaboration and quietly protects product quality more than most people realize.
Recently, I read an article which explains the importance and whole process of code review in detail. It's definitely worth a read:
