Code review generally requires a peer to do the reviewing, so most folks would likely say that doesn’t count. I was curious if it would, but the first couple pages of googled results confirm the peer aspect.

That's certainly better than reviewing your own code, but tossing your code into a merge request to run tests and then taking another look over it tomorrow if it's all green is still better than just pushing straight to prod because there's not another pair of eyes.

> but tossing your code into a merge request to run tests and then taking another look over it tomorrow

Or even just immediately. I often find minor issues just by looking at it in a different context (the merge request vs my editor).

Naturally. That’s a different process from a code review though, which is what this thread is discussing.

It's the same process as code review. It is code review.

Agree to disagree then, per wikipedia and several other sources that pop up when googling.

You might have never seen the diff all at once.

But you wouldn't commit that as there are multiple tools to review a commit before you literally stamp your name on that commit? Otherwise you are generating noise for your teammates.

In practice, reviewing your own code in a different context really makes a difference, at least for me. Not sure why, but I always notice things I wouldn't before. The same effects holds true even for regular text - as much as I try, proofreading my writing in editor yields subpar results compared to reading a submitted message, I simply fail to notice even the most blatant mistakes. I wonder if this effect has a name.