4 ms·
I'm so glad to hear a pithy saying given to this. So many times I've fought for ripping out some indirection-heavy pattern and just doing {thing} procedurally,
by syncsynchalt 10y ago
I'm so glad to hear a pithy saying given to this.
So many times I've fought for ripping out some indirection-heavy pattern and just doing {thing} procedurally, only to run up against the concern of the duplication it'll introduce.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- weberc2 10y agoThis doesn't validate the procedural position in a procedural vs polymorphism debate; if anything, the example can be summarized by "there was a good polymorphic abstraction, programmer B came along and couldn't figure out how to extend the abstraction to implement his new requirement, so he made the abstraction less polymorphic and more procedural, and then this happened over and over again until the accumulated procedural logic made the whole thing unbearably bad". I think the appropriate summary for this article would be: bastardized abstraction < duplicated logic < proper abstraction.