3 ms·
I always felt that if I can't put my code to others' scrutiny and live with the fact that it has errors and be glad that others spent THEIR time to help ME find
by GrandMasterBirt 18y ago
I always felt that if I can't put my code to others' scrutiny and live with the fact that it has errors and be glad that others spent THEIR time to help ME find problems, then I am a pretty crappy programmer. After all I can't expect myself to be the omnipotent programmer who writes perfect code.
Edit: I always felt that if someone did not look at some code and find a problem with it, they just didn't look hard enough :)
- jimbokun 18y agoI think I would feel I was making other programmers do too much of my work if I just sent them code that I new was bad, and have them waste time to look at it and just confirm that, yes, it's bad. That's different, of course, from making your best effort and then asking someone who you think is good at programming to find all the places you could do better.
- GrandMasterBirt 18y agoMy friend's company has a policy: Everyone gets code reviews all the time by peers. The benefit is, the reviewer gets to learn a different part of the system, and the person getting reviewed gets his code scrutinized. It is a very beneficial system. As far as showing bad code: There is a different between delivering crap and delivering code you are satisfied with. If you are satisfied with it, thats when scrutiny is necessary. You need to get a feel for when the code is good enough, because you can spend all your life making it just a bit better. Same kind of stuff applies to artists, you just need to know when to stop improving and start letting others scrutinize the work.