The paper's title is a bit provocative but I think the findings are interesting. Mainly around long-held beliefs about what developers perceive as the value vs what is actually happening.
You do bring up a good point about using change defect rate though. I wish the researchers had cited that as the preferred unit of measurement. I did some research on change defect rates on popular open source projects and it's all over the map. Ranging from ~12 - ~40% [1].
The future I'd like to see is as developers we use objective measures to justify time investment for review. This is going to be increasingly important as agents start banging out small bug-fix tickets.
You do bring up a good point about using change defect rate though. I wish the researchers had cited that as the preferred unit of measurement. I did some research on change defect rates on popular open source projects and it's all over the map. Ranging from ~12 - ~40% [1].
The future I'd like to see is as developers we use objective measures to justify time investment for review. This is going to be increasingly important as agents start banging out small bug-fix tickets.
[1] https://www.shepherdly.io/post/benchmarking-risk-quality-kpi...