Skip to article frontmatterSkip to article content

Peer Review Guidelines

When writing a peer review give the code a look over and think about the questions below. Giving a couple of sentences for each of the questions is sufficient. Code examples are even better!

  1. Easy to read and understand?

    • Are the doc-strings useful?

    • Are variables and functions named descriptively when useful?

    • Are the comments helpful?

  2. Does the code follow a consistent style?

    • Is there a consistent style? PEP8

  3. Is the code written succinctly and efficiently?

    • Was there superfluous code sections?

    • Was the code written clearly?

    • Was the code written elegantly without decreasing readability?

Make sure to suggest constructive ways to improve all of the above along with:

  • Clever ways to use built-in functionality (when appropriate)

  • Simpler ways to implement the same functionality

  • General improvements to structure, style, and naming

  • Be courteous to the person you are reviewing!

Rubric

<td><ul>
    <li>No doc-strings</li>
    <li>Variables and functions are named indecipherably</li>
    <li>No or inaccurate comments</li>
    </ul>
</td>
Criteria3 points2 points1 point
Readability

  • Doc-strings are clear and accurate

  • Variables and functions are named descriptively when useful

  • Comments are placed in appropriate places and are clear and accurate

  • Doc-strings are present but not completely descriptive

  • Variables and functions are sometimes named helpfully

  • Comments are present but not always accurate or in the most helpful of places

Style

  • PEP 8 or other style is consistent

  • Indentation is clean and not mixed

  • Style is mostly consistent with something

  • Style is of a by-gone era but may come back someday (not today)

Code Awesome

  • Code was succinct and clean

  • Upon a glance you completely understood the code

  • This code defines elegance

  • Code was overall clean but there were a couple spots

  • Code was mostly clear except for a couple of spots

  • Code worked but may have been a bit hard to follow

  • Code had large sections that did nothing

  • Code was very hard to follow

  • Code got the job done but no one would ever understand why

Introduction to numerical methods
Solving Boundary Value Problems
Introduction to numerical methods
Save your work!