3 ms·
The code is not always about the code but mindset, culture and attitude. Usually what happens is the attitude carries throughout. E.g. when developers start s
by re-thc 4y ago
The code is not always about the code but mindset, culture and attitude.
Usually what happens is the attitude carries throughout.
E.g. when developers start saying that optimisations don't matter they get into the habit of never doing it until it breaks. At that point it's too costly to fix and spirals out of control.
Why not just get into the good habit of writing good code that might cost a bit more upfront but will settle down and be a positive impact going forward?
Is good code just for the outcome?
Your statement neglects that developers are humans. If you have a new hire and they look at the code and have to spend forever understanding it - is that not a cost? Or perhaps they'd look for the next job just based on how much it annoys them.
It's the same as not cleaning your house or office. The desk is just a tool so you can get your outcome. Let's leave it right? Let's also not mind if rats watch you do your work!
Being a perfectionist is bad and for that I agree but that's not code specific. I don't get the concern. Surely people also spend too much time on things like presentations that might not impact the outcome. It's all just human nature and not developer specific.
- bruce511 4y agoI think the key point was this line; >> it should be constantly rewritten There's nothing wrong with writing good code. Ideally it should be good the first time, not the 3rd or 4th time. If you are writing code in a well architected system, using consistent techniques and styling, then it's not a mess, but it doesn't need to be perfect.Good enough implies good. To follow your cleaning analogy, there's some cleaning to do regularly (maintainence etc) but you don't raze the building and rebuild every 5 years just because a new kind of brick comes out.
- re-thc 4y ago>> you don't raze the building and rebuild every 5 years just because a new kind of brick comes out. Say those organisations that have brand new offices all the time and move staff into it? Say those people that do home renovations? It does happen. For whatever reason. And no 1 says it has be rewritten completely. So the same applies. Whether you've upgraded your PC, replaced your monitor, your clothes or anything like that you don't "need to" to do whatever task but you do. I get back to the point of why single out developers for any of it? I'm not defending developers in particular. It's just human nature. Getting a new logo that looks 90% the same for millions is likely 100% worse than rewriting some part of the code. What's the justification to rebrand, get a new logo, new name, change the font a little, etc? There's no need to get a new website either is there? Do you 1st go out and get data that a new website will attract more customers before doing it?