4 ms·
Yeah nah. We don’t describe code as “awful” because we truly want to rewrite from scratch. Code can be quite awful simply because a company has a high developer
by manicdee 8y ago
Yeah nah. We don’t describe code as “awful” because we truly want to rewrite from scratch. Code can be quite awful simply because a company has a high developer turnover due to hiring practices (you can code? Good, write our payroll system) and management (the bearings will continue until morale improves).
As a result you end up with every function using different nomenclature, different approaches to encapsulation, differing levels of compliance to Demeter, bizarre side effects because they made sense in the one day that developer was allowed for that feature, and so on.
So “less than ideal patterns and practices” does indeed count as “awful” code where the maintainer has to learn a new coding style for every file in the codebase.
- jehlakj 8y agoAgreed. It's impractical to incorporate "ideal patterns and practices", but competent developers can get pretty close. Having said that, I much prefer working with code that is very simple and redundant with a verbose API, than with a codebase that is overly refactored and abstracted. Finding the balance of the two extremes would be my definition of an ideal pattern.