I agree that code review has merrit. I could toss in a few spins that might be interesting as well.

Review criteria
There might be a skeleton of criteria to examine code by.

• formatting and "standards" compliance
• error handling
• clarity
• maintainability
• etc.

Obviously this just to mention some of the domains where by code should be reviewed.

Eligibility
I think that other areas serve the new and developing programmers well. Personally, I don't necessarily want to see reviews of yet another input form processing program.

Perhaps candidates need to accomplish *something* before being sumitted to the review queue.

Review board
Same sort of idea goes for reviewers. If someone is going to review code they need to provide constructive feedback and be skilled at not totally shredding someone else's code.

---

On a personal note. I have a module that I'd like to share but am anxious to do so. I have fears of total shreddage if I do so. For me, I'd like to have at least one round of private code review at which point I'll feel more comfortable with public criticisms. In my case, I'm working with someone like myself from my local Perl Mongors group.

Perhaps we could have a 1:1 mentoring mechanism with the purpose of facillitating that process.