3 ms·
Honestly, to me this looks like normal good code. It reads from top to bottom, exits early, does not have conditions so long that they require lines to be wrapp
by yoz-y 8y ago
Honestly, to me this looks like normal good code. It reads from top to bottom, exits early, does not have conditions so long that they require lines to be wrapped, it has function that are long or wide but not both... Does not seem to superfluously refactor code into functions called only once.
Maybe there are too many comments, but for code that is critical and might be harder to understand at a glance that is better.
- hinkley 8y agoThe longest functions don’t follow the same guard clause style as many of the shorter functions and I think that’s a mistake. That half the file avoids else clauses and half don’t tells me there’s an argument here that was never adequately resolved. I think we’re missing about six functions and a couple more refractors, then tone down the a couple parts of the lecture. As it is it’s obvious that many different hands were in it (and if you look at git blame, one of them doesn’t know how to revert changes properly and needs to stay after school for extra lessons. If this file is so important it shouldn’t have the most critical lines with a “revert changes” comment as the commit message. You done goofed, son.)