4 ms·
Yes no doubt but good and bad code is not binary. There are different levels of good and bad code. The tricky part is determine for this feature what is good en
by dnndev 6y ago
Yes no doubt but good and bad code is not binary. There are different levels of good and bad code. The tricky part is determine for this feature what is good enough and not so good it took me 5x for when 1x of goodness would have given me the same return on investment. As my new role of someone who pays the bills this is a lot more important where as a dev I was viewing things from an academic lens.
We don’t always do good enough... some times we need extremely well done due to the sensitive nature of the code.. it all depends.
- kaba0 6y agoThanks for your point of view!
- vendiddy 6y agoReading comments like this gives me hope. There seems to be a polarized view of "jewels are worthless, just ship" or "we need more jewels". Both perspectives are dangerous. Software-jewels have a place, but you have to be selective about what code needs to be that level of quality. And like so many decisions in software development, it's about the trade-offs. If we're writing experimental code with a low shelf-life or internal tooling, we are better off writing code we expect to throw away completely. Writing high quality code here will take time away from making code quality high in areas where it's important. On the other hand, if there are some subsystems critical to our business--we want them robust, extensible, and fast--they are good candidates for "jewel" quality. But you have to allow the time needed for a potential rewrite and more thoughtful architecture.