Search across all documentation pages
Code review is the team's main teaching loop for Rust craft: ownership, async pitfalls, unsafe boundaries, and test gaps. High-signal culture means clear standards, respectful feedback, and predictable turnaround - not perfectionism that blocks delivery.
Quick-reference recipe card - copy-paste ready.
## PR description template
**Intent:** one sentence
**Risk:** migration / perf / unsafe / security
**Test evidence:** `cargo test`, miri, benchmark note
**Rollback:** flag or revert plan
## Review comment tiers
🔴 Must fix - correctness, safety, data loss
🟡 Should fix - clarity, missing test (defer with ticket OK)
🟢 Nit - style; author discretionWhen to reach for this:
// Author documents intentional trade-off for reviewers
// REVIEW: kept sync read here - RFC-042 phase 1 read-only path.
// Async sqlx migration tracked in ENG-4412.
pub async fn get_catalog_item(pool: &sqlx::PgPool, id: &str) -> Result<Item, AppError> {
let row = sqlx::query_as!(Item, "SELECT id, name FROM items WHERE id = $1", id)
.fetch_one(pool)
.await?;
Ok(row)
}# Reviewer local checklist
cargo test -p orders-api
cargo clippy -- -D warnings
# If PR touches unsafe:
cargo miri test -p ffi-bridgeWhat this demonstrates:
unsafe PRs trigger extra CI expectationsunsafe invariants documented.rustfmt + clippy in CI - not debated in review.cargo audit on dependency changes.unsafe/ and migrations/.unsafe second reviewer - Fix: Governance policy requires two approvers.| Alternative | Use When | Don't Use When |
|---|---|---|
| Pair programming instead of async review | Complex refactor in flight | Distributed team default |
| Rubber duck LGTM bots | Emergency only | Normal quality bar |
| Formal inspection checklist | Regulated releases | Early startup speed |
| Post-merge review | Experimental branch | main protected branch |
Target <400 LOC diff; vertical slices beat layer dumps.
CODEOWNERS + one domain reviewer; two for unsafe and migrations.
No merge without another human on protected branches.
Ask questions; suggest alternatives; avoid "just" and personal criticism.
OK with ticket link; tech lead tracks debt in sprint planning.
Required when author claims perf improvement; Criterion delta in PR.
Review generator inputs and snapshots; do not hand-read every line.
Team agrees 24h; escalate in standup if breached.
Link to internal doc or Rust book section once; avoid lecture threads.
Add checklist item to PR template if incident class was missed in review.
Stack versions: This page was written for Rust 1.97.0 (edition 2024), Tokio 1.x, Axum 0.8, serde 1.0, sqlx 0.8, clap 4, and Polars 0.46+.
Reviewed by Chris St. John·Last updated Jul 16, 2026