5 ms·

Don't you think actually breaking them into functions is excessive? I think any programmer worth their salt, with the aid of sublime text style search, can unde

Don't you think actually breaking them into functions is excessive? I think any programmer worth their salt, with the aid of sublime text style search, can understand any codebase.

oldandtired 9y ago
Interesting that you write "any programmer worth their salt" has to have the aid of "sublime text style search". Having had to maintain and rebuild other programmers' monstrosities of monolithic functions, I appreciate short code routines and relevant comments, especially those that detail why the code is written that way. I then don't have to spend enormous amounts of time trying to understand the thought processes that went into making that code. If you are worth your "salt", you will write clear code and when it needs to be "tricky", you detail "the why" that you needed to do this. Different people have different standards as to what is clear code and often, this is dependent on the idiomatic usage within the language in question. A real simple example for you to ponder: if a < b & b < c & c < d & d <= e then { do something} compare with if a < b < c < d <= e then { do something } In this particular case, the first is how many programmers would write the condition, whereas the second is idiomatically more correct. The second is also, in this instance directly self documenting. Of course, how you will do this in your favourite language will be different.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
knieveltech 9y ago
Even if your assertion is true (and I've seen some codebases that would certainly put it to the test) on what grounds is spending an indeterminate (likely nontrivial) amount of time groveling a codebase with search preferable to having the code at least somewhat organized and documented in the first place?
xelxebar 9y ago
Not at all. All else being equal, if I can write code that is understandable to more people with less effort, that seems like an obvious win. I couldn't care less about sizing up your programming saltiness.

Don't you think actually breaking them into functions is excessive? I think any programmer worth their salt, with the aid of sublime text style search, can understand any codebase.

oldandtired 9y ago

Interesting that you write "any programmer worth their salt" has to have the aid of "sublime text style search". Having had to maintain and rebuild other programmers' monstrosities of monolithic functions, I appreciate short code routines and relevant comments, especially those that detail why the code is written that way. I then don't have to spend enormous amounts of time trying to understand the thought processes that went into making that code. If you are worth your "salt", you will write clear code and when it needs to be "tricky", you detail "the why" that you needed to do this. Different people have different standards as to what is clear code and often, this is dependent on the idiomatic usage within the language in question. A real simple example for you to ponder: if a < b & b < c & c < d & d <= e then { do something} compare with if a < b < c < d <= e then { do something } In this particular case, the first is how many programmers would write the condition, whereas the second is idiomatically more correct. The second is also, in this instance directly self documenting. Of course, how you will do this in your favourite language will be different.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

knieveltech 9y ago

Even if your assertion is true (and I've seen some codebases that would certainly put it to the test) on what grounds is spending an indeterminate (likely nontrivial) amount of time groveling a codebase with search preferable to having the code at least somewhat organized and documented in the first place?

xelxebar 9y ago

Not at all. All else being equal, if I can write code that is understandable to more people with less effort, that seems like an obvious win. I couldn't care less about sizing up your programming saltiness.