As the comments all over this thread demonstrate, code review is done for many reasons. Where I&#x27;ve worked, the reasons have not been clearly stated, and as a result there is a lot of time wasted. I wouldn&#x27;t say that there should not be code reviews, but they could be cut way down. A code review should not be a substitute for a design review. It often is, in my experience. A code review should not be done for anything that can be done by static code analysis: code style, finding dead code, etc.<p>Also, a lot depends on how code reviews are done. I&#x27;ve seen them used as a veto, with lots of back and forth to get the veto removed over subjective and trivial issues. Don&#x27;t do that.<p>Finally, let&#x27;s be honest. Some people&#x27;s code doesn&#x27;t need review. Time spent reviewing such code is wasted. But it is often socially difficult to say this, so everyone&#x27;s code gets reviewed.<p>Other people can&#x27;t be trusted to write acceptable code, and reviews are essential. That&#x27;s a different problem. (Beyond the scope of this note. Left as an exercise to the reader. Other cliches may apply.)