3 ms·

Lets hope the next time someone has their mind bent while modifying your code a really good QA person tests it afterwards :). > And keep in mind many of these

Lets hope the next time someone has their mind bent while modifying your code a really good QA person tests it afterwards :). > And keep in mind many of these phrases are very fancy ways of something that makes intuitive sense if you're familiar with it. Every piece of code is easy to deal with once you're familiar with it. But maintainable code is about allowing other people to easily work on it. I pity the guy trying to fix some old legacy code base, while also trying to figure out what the hell a combinator is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatory_logic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatory_logic

asdfman123 6y ago
But see, the difference is something that is confusing to a beginner is quite a bit different than something that is just overwhelmingly complex for anyone. And "simple" code has far more risk of side effect than well architected code, which is quite the opposite of what you assert. Getting to the bottom of what you need to change is complicated if you're new, but once you get past the learning curve it's straightforward. On the other hand, a "simple" code structure can becoming a steaming pile of garbage if you want to make any real changes to it. To be very clear, I'm talking using something like composition instead of making a big file with cyclomatic complexity -- not arguing for some of those other things, which in all honesty I'm not completely familiar with. Really just arguing that sometimes this stuff seems impossible and dumb when you're starting out, but easy and intuitive when you learn more. > I pity the guy trying to fix some old legacy code base, while also trying to figure out what the hell a combinator is That goes to my other point: it's wrapped up in excessively formal language, but the actual ideas are simple. I think they might be for instance just advocating the use of functional programming, and juniors use Javascript lambdas every single day without knowing what the hell a combinator is.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
  Very good points. Even though they might feel the same, on a human level, there’s clearly a difference between being early in the learning curve and facing down a complex system.
valenterry 6y ago
> But maintainable code is about allowing other people to easily work on it. But as OP said, it is selective. For instance, I would much rather have the OP use the strategy pattern. I have used it before, I will recognize it and it will take me tons of time when trying to understand the codebase and making a change that doesn't break things. We cannot find a global optimum, we have to decide if we prefer to make it easier for experts/experienced developers or for beginners. I prefer the former and then teach beginners to become experts/experienced (in some area) as quickly as possible. That costs resources but pays off in the end. Google went the opposite way. They created Go to be beginner's friendly but at the same time hurting productivity of more experienced developers. Let's see how that turns out in the end.
- jcelerier 6y ago
  > Google went the opposite way. They created Go to be beginner's friendly but at the same time hurting productivity of more experienced developers. Let's see how that turns out in the end. well, they started the Fuschia kernel in C++, not in Go... that should be telling enough :)

asdfman123 6y ago

But see, the difference is something that is confusing to a beginner is quite a bit different than something that is just overwhelmingly complex for anyone. And "simple" code has far more risk of side effect than well architected code, which is quite the opposite of what you assert. Getting to the bottom of what you need to change is complicated if you're new, but once you get past the learning curve it's straightforward. On the other hand, a "simple" code structure can becoming a steaming pile of garbage if you want to make any real changes to it. To be very clear, I'm talking using something like composition instead of making a big file with cyclomatic complexity -- not arguing for some of those other things, which in all honesty I'm not completely familiar with. Really just arguing that sometimes this stuff seems impossible and dumb when you're starting out, but easy and intuitive when you learn more. > I pity the guy trying to fix some old legacy code base, while also trying to figure out what the hell a combinator is That goes to my other point: it's wrapped up in excessively formal language, but the actual ideas are simple. I think they might be for instance just advocating the use of functional programming, and juniors use Javascript lambdas every single day without knowing what the hell a combinator is.

9wzYQbTYsAIc 6y ago
Very good points. Even though they might feel the same, on a human level, there’s clearly a difference between being early in the learning curve and facing down a complex system.

valenterry 6y ago

> But maintainable code is about allowing other people to easily work on it. But as OP said, it is selective. For instance, I would much rather have the OP use the strategy pattern. I have used it before, I will recognize it and it will take me tons of time when trying to understand the codebase and making a change that doesn't break things. We cannot find a global optimum, we have to decide if we prefer to make it easier for experts/experienced developers or for beginners. I prefer the former and then teach beginners to become experts/experienced (in some area) as quickly as possible. That costs resources but pays off in the end. Google went the opposite way. They created Go to be beginner's friendly but at the same time hurting productivity of more experienced developers. Let's see how that turns out in the end.

jcelerier 6y ago
> Google went the opposite way. They created Go to be beginner's friendly but at the same time hurting productivity of more experienced developers. Let's see how that turns out in the end. well, they started the Fuschia kernel in C++, not in Go... that should be telling enough :)