The Code Review Process at a Startup

Level 1: No Second Pair of Eyes

Imagine you’ve written a big essay for class, and you ask a friend, “Hey, can you check my work for mistakes before I hand it in?” But instead of helping, your friend just smiles and says, “We don’t do that here,” and waves their hand like it’s no big deal. 😅 In real life, you’d probably be shocked or laugh because normally you expect someone to double-check important things.

This meme is funny for the same reason: usually, when someone writes new code (kind of like a homework assignment for programmers), they ask a teammate to review it – to see if there are any errors or if it could be improved. That’s like having a friend proofread your essay. But in the picture, the “startup” (a small, fast-moving company) basically says, “Nope, we don’t review code in this place.” It’s like turning in your homework without anyone checking it at all!

The humor comes from how confidently the character in the image rejects the idea – with a cool hand gesture and the phrase “We don’t do that here.” It’s a playful way of saying the startup is a bit wild and skips the usual careful step. Emotionally, it’s both amusing and a little bit “yikes!”. We laugh because it’s bold and rebellious, but we also know skipping a check is risky (imagine the surprise if there’s a big mistake). Just like you’d giggle if a friend joked about not proofreading an essay, developers giggle (and groan) at the idea of not reviewing code. It’s funny because it’s a carefree approach, and sometimes in real life, people really do that when they’re in a rush. So the meme exaggerates that scenario: a programmer expecting someone to review their code, and the startup basically saying with a smile, “Nah, around here, we just trust it and ship it!”

Level 2: Code Review 101

Let’s break down what’s happening in this meme for those newer to the concept. The joke centers on code reviews (also known as peer reviews in software development) and how they sometimes get ignored at startups. First off, what is a code review? It’s when another developer looks over your code changes before those changes are added to the main codebase. Think of it like having a friend read over your essay or check your homework for mistakes – except it’s developers checking each other’s code for bugs, readability, and overall quality. The idea is to catch issues early, share knowledge among the team, and keep the code consistent. In many teams, when you finish working on a feature or bug fix, you don’t just put it directly into the product. Instead, you create something called a Pull Request (often abbreviated as PR). A pull request is basically a request to merge your code changes into the main code, but it pauses the process so others can review and discuss those changes first.

Now, what does the meme show? The text at the top says:
Me: “So who will review my code?”
Startups: [image of T’Challa from Black Panther] “We don’t do that here.”

The image is a still from Marvel’s Black Panther, where the character T’Challa (the Black Panther himself) humorously declines something by saying, “We don’t do that here.” It’s a line that has become a popular meme. People use it to joke about any scenario where someone might expect a common practice, but the response is a confident “No, not in this place.” Here, that common practice is code review. The developer is basically asking, “So, who’s going to double-check my code changes?” and the startup is proudly (or maybe sheepishly) saying, “Yeah...no one. We don’t really review code in this environment.” This is the we_dont_do_that_here_quote in action.

Why would a startup say they don’t do code reviews? Let’s give a bit of context. A startup is a young company, often with a small team, trying to build a product quickly and find success in the market. There’s a popular phrase associated with startups: “move fast and break things.” This slogan (originally from Facebook’s early days) captures the attitude of many startups: it’s more important to make quick progress (and accept that some stuff might break) than to be slow and careful about every change. That’s what we mean by process_shortcuts – startups sometimes shortcut formal processes like code reviews, detailed documentation, or extensive testing because they’re trying to get a product out the door before the money runs out or before competitors beat them. In a phrase, startup_engineering_practices are often about being lean and fast, even if that means being a bit risky.

In a typical code review process at a larger company or established team, here’s how it might go:

1. You create a new “branch” of the code (a separate line of development) for your work.
2. You make your changes on that branch and commit them (save the changes to version control, usually with a message describing the change).
3. You then push that branch to a platform like GitHub or GitLab and open a Pull Request. The PR shows all the differences between your branch and the main branch (often called main or master).
4. Your teammates get notified about the PR. One or more of them will review the changes. They’ll read through your code, maybe run it or test it, and leave comments. They might suggest improvements or spot bugs or just ask questions if something isn’t clear.
5. You address any feedback – maybe by changing some code – and eventually, one of your peers (or a team lead) will approve the PR.
6. Once approved (and all automated tests pass, if there are any), you merge the code into the main branch. Now your code is officially part of the product and can be deployed to users.

This process sounds a bit long, but it’s very common because it helps maintain code quality. It’s like having an editor for your article, or a teacher grading your draft before it’s final. It catches mistakes you might have missed and helps everyone on the team stay on the same page.

Now, imagine a startup scenario. Let’s say the “team” is just you and one other developer, or maybe a trio of coders in a garage (the classic startup imagery). You’re all working crazy hours to get version 1.0 of your app ready. In that setting, the code review process might feel cumbersome. If every change had to wait for someone else to review, it could slow things down, especially if you’re literally sitting next to each other and communicating in real time. Sometimes the team trusts each other enough (or is under so much time pressure) that they skip that formal PR dance. They might verbally discuss the change or do a super quick glance, but basically, they merge code directly without an official review step.

We can illustrate the difference with a simple example in terms of Git commands (Git is a popular version control system developers use):

# In a typical company workflow (using a Pull Request for code review):
git checkout -b new-feature            # create a new branch for your work
# ...make some code changes...
git add .                              # stage the changes for commit
git commit -m "Add new feature"        # commit with a message describing the change
git push origin new-feature            # push the branch to remote repository
# Now you'd go to GitHub/GitLab and open a Pull Request for 'new-feature' into 'main'.
# Team members will review the code in the PR before it gets merged.

# In a fast-paced startup workflow (skipping the formal review step):
git checkout main                      # make sure you're on main (production) branch
# ...make code changes directly on main or a local branch...
git add .                              # stage all changes
git commit -m "Quickly add new feature"
git push origin main                   # push directly to main, deploying changes immediately (no PR)
# This goes straight into the main codebase without waiting for peer approval.

In the first scenario, there’s a pause for others to look at your code (CodeReview step). In the second, it’s like saying “code is ready, let’s release it now” without asking for a second opinion. The meme is highlighting that second scenario. The developer asking “Who will review my code?” expects the first workflow (because maybe they learned that code should be reviewed). The startup replying “We don’t do that here” is essentially saying, we skip straight to pushing code. It’s no_code_review in practice.

For new developers (perhaps you just got your first job at a startup), this might be both exciting and a little scary. Exciting because you have a lot of autonomy – nobody is stopping you from shipping code! Scary because you might be thinking, “What if I made a mistake? Isn’t someone going to double-check this?” You can feel the DeveloperFrustration or anxiety: having someone review your code can be reassuring, especially when you’re new. It’s like a safety net or a chance to learn better techniques from feedback. Without it, you might learn the hard way by seeing your code fail in production or by later code changes revealing flaws in your approach.

The meme’s humor comes from the exaggerated, straightforward way the startup dismisses the idea of code reviews. The Black Panther reference adds a playful dramatic flair – it’s as if the startup culture is proudly unique or contrarian, just like the fictional nation of Wakanda in the movie had its own ways. The line “We don’t do that here” is used ironically; it’s not that code reviews are unknown or unheard of, it’s that this particular environment chooses to not do them. This is a classic process shortcut. To be clear, not all startups skip code reviews – many do implement at least lightweight reviews because they know the value. But it’s a common enough stereotype that if you say “early startup” to a room of developers, someone will joke about crazy hacks, no documentation, and no testing or reviews.

When you see tags like CodeReviewPainPoints, it’s referring to the kind of problems that arise when doing code reviews or not doing them. For example, a pain point could be “Reviews slow me down when I’m sure my code is fine,” or conversely, “Not having reviews means a silly bug slipped in.” In our meme’s context, the pain point hinted at is the latter – if nobody reviews code, issues might slip through unnoticed. The tag DeveloperHumor just signals that this is meant to be taken as a joke shared among developers, often poking fun at the quirks of our industry. And DeveloperFrustration acknowledges that behind the joke, there’s a real frustration: developers usually want to write good code and avoid bugs, and lacking a review process can be frustrating or seen as risky.

To sum up this level: code reviews = an important practice where fellow devs check each other’s work. Startups = fast-moving teams that sometimes skip formal practices to save time. The meme uses a popular movie quote (“We don’t do that here”) to humorously illustrate a startup saying “nope” to code reviews. If you’re new to coding, just know that this is a tongue-in-cheek take; in many environments, someone will review your code (and you’ll likely be asked to review others’ code too). If you find yourself at a place that says otherwise, well… now you know you might be in a “move fast, break things” kind of startup!

Level 3: Move Fast, Skip Review

In this meme, a developer innocently asks, “So who will review my code?” The startup team responds with King T’Challa’s famous hand-waving line from Black Panther: “We don’t do that here.” This punchline lands because it contrasts a best practice (code reviews via pull requests) with the scrappy reality of many early-stage startups. It’s a bit of developer humor that makes seasoned engineers smirk and junior devs raise an eyebrow. The scene captures a cultural CodeReview clash: formal peer review vs. the move_fast_break_things ethos.

At mature companies (Big Tech, established product teams), code reviews are almost sacred. Every change to the codebase goes through a Pull Request (PR) workflow. Peers scrutinize the diff, leave comments about potential bugs or style issues, and ultimately give a thumbs-up (“LGTM” – Looks Good To Me) before merging to the main branch. This process isn’t just bureaucratic ritual; it’s quality assurance, knowledge sharing, and a safety net to catch mistakes. Requiring reviews on PRs can save you from deploying that one-line fix that actually takes down the login service at 2 AM (we’ve all been there). CodeReviewPainPoints often only become apparent after a bug sneaks into production, which is why experienced teams insist on reviews even when it’s inconvenient.

Startups, on the other hand, often live by the mantra of speed. Shipping features quickly to achieve an MVP (Minimum Viable Product) or appease investors can take priority over thorough process. In these freewheeling environments, developers might push code directly to main without any formal peer review. It’s essentially no_code_review by design. Why? Maybe the team is too small (if you’re the only developer, a peer review becomes a literal self-review). Or maybe everyone’s wearing five hats – there’s simply no time for a two-day code critique cycle when your runway (both financial and competitive) is shrinking. Process_shortcuts become the norm. The unspoken motto is “just merge it – we’ll fix it later if it breaks.” This pragmatic recklessness is what Facebook popularized as “move fast and break things.” In other words, get the code out the door; we’ll deal with consequences when we have actual users. It’s both thrilling and terrifying: thrilling because you deploy features at light speed, terrifying because you might also deploy spectacular bugs.

The humor of the meme lies in this absurd yet common scenario. A new developer (or one coming from a disciplined team) expects some oversight – someone to say “Hey, this part could be improved” or “Oops, you forgot to handle that null case.” Instead, the startup responds with a casual Wakanda-style dismissal: “We don’t do that here.” The image of T’Challa raising his palm in a polite stop gesture perfectly embodies that response. It’s a cinematic way of saying, “Code reviews? Nah, not in our house.” The black_panther_reference amplifies the joke because the line “We don’t do that here” is a well-known meme template. Developers have reused it whenever a common best practice is conspicuously absent. No documentation? We don’t do that here. No testing before deploy? We don’t do that here. In this case, no PR review process? Exactly. It’s funny because it’s true – many startup veterans will recall the wild west days of committing straight to production with a mix of pride and horror.

From a senior engineer’s perspective, the meme also hides a hint of DeveloperFrustration and cautionary truth. Skipping code reviews can speed up development in the short term, but it tends to accumulate technical debt. Every unchecked commit is a potential bug or design flaw waiting to bite later. When you hear “we don’t do that here” regarding code reviews, you might translate it as “we’ll clean up the mess later (probably at 3 AM during an outage).” The shared laughter comes from knowing how this story often ends. Seasoned devs have fought those production fires that a simple peer review could have prevented. They’ve seen startup_engineering_practices evolve the hard way: initial cowboy coding turning into chaotic codebases that practically beg for refactoring. It’s a cycle – early on, no time for reviews; later on, no time to not have reviews, because the cost of mistakes grows. The meme’s exaggerated hand-wave is basically management dismissing concerns about code quality: Just ship it, we’ll worry about it if it breaks.

To put this contrast into perspective, consider a quick comparison between a scrappy startup and a mature company approach:

Scrappy Startup 😅	Mature Company 🧐
“We don’t do code reviews here.” Waves off PRs as overhead.	Strict code review policy for every change.
Direct commits to main (or even production) to go fast.	Changes go via Pull Requests, awaiting approval.
Goal: ship the MVP ASAP, even if it’s held together with duct tape.	Goal: maintain stability and quality with each release.
Move fast, accept that things might break (fix forward).	Prefer not to break things – review to catch issues early.
Few developers, everyone is extremely trusted (or overloaded).	Larger team, built-in accountability and knowledge sharing.
Code quality issues and bugs addressed reactively (when they explode).	Many bugs caught proactively during the review, before merge.

This table isn’t to say one side is “good” and the other “bad” outright – it highlights trade-offs. In a tiny startup racing against time, formal processes feel like a luxury. The team might be thinking: “Why have a lengthy CodeReview discussion on a feature that might be completely different next week if we pivot? Just code it and let’s see if it flies.” Meanwhile, in a big engineering org, not having code review is unthinkable – it’d be considered reckless. The meme nails this dichotomy with a single image and a subtitle. DeveloperHumor often springs from these shared truths and pains: we laugh because yes, we’ve seen that hand-wave response to quality control in real life and lived to tell the tale (often while muttering “never again” under our breath).

So, the senior-level gist: Asking “who will review my code” in some startups is like asking “where’s the seatbelt” in a drag race car – you might get a chuckle and a “we don’t do that here” in return. It’s a mix of dark humor and genuine caution. The meme resonates because it takes a specific CodeReviewPainPoints scenario and elevates it with a pop culture reference, evoking a knowing laugh from anyone who’s worked under a fast-and-loose startup engineering culture.