[Feature] Add Grid View Support (Bad practice) #2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an example of a bad practice, raising big PRs that are hard to review and increases chances of merging faulty code.
Large Pull Requests (PRs) pose challenges due to their complexity, which can lead to increased review times, difficulty in understanding the scope of changes, and a higher risk of introducing bugs. Uncle Bob (Robert C. Martin) emphasizes small, manageable changes for maintaining software quality, aligning with principles like the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP). Small PRs enhance the review process by reducing cognitive load, improving the quality of feedback, and facilitating easier integration and testing.
On the topic of including screenshots in PRs, while they can significantly aid in the review of visual changes by providing immediate context and identifying potential visual issues early, their absence can lead to increased review times and challenges in visualizing UI changes. Screenshots serve as quick, visual documentation that can make the review process more efficient, especially for frontend changes. However, for non-visual changes, such as backend updates, they may not be necessary. Balancing the use of screenshots with concise, informative descriptions can optimize the review process, ensuring both efficiency and thoroughness.