4 ms·
I don't agree with the fundamental concern. I think sacrificing maintainability for ease of use is a valid thing to do. Saving 100x 20 minutes in developer tim
by LeanderK 9y ago
I don't agree with the fundamental concern. I think sacrificing maintainability for ease of use is a valid thing to do.
Saving 100x 20 minutes in developer time for the library users for taking an hour more to implement a feature is a good trade.
Every rule has an exception, but fluent interfaces being bad for maintainability is often justified.
- mcphage 9y ago> I think sacrificing maintainability for ease of use is a valid thing to do. I agree. If you're not willing to make your developers' lives easier, then what are you doing writing a public library in the first place?
- draw_down 9y agoEasier than what?
- cs02rm0 9y agoYeah. It's a tool, use it in moderation when most appropriate and you should be ok. Yegor often seems to take an extreme position, which makes for a good discussion especially as there's usually some truth in what he says but I suspect there are no silver bullets to find here.
- hodgesrm 9y agoPersonally I like fluent interfaces because they enable IDE users to write correct code quickly. That's a big win in languages like Java. The changes you make to enable fluent interfaces underneath are just boilerplate code that is unlikely to have errors or require much maintenance. At least that's my experience.