3 ms·

But what is "good code", even? For some people that's thousands of two-line methods in hundreds of classes where each part is easy to understand. For others it

by whstl 3y ago

But what is "good code", even? For some people that's thousands of two-line methods in hundreds of classes where each part is easy to understand. For others it is more direct code that is optimized for debugging, but not as aesthetically pleasant. Very often those two groups people dislike each other's code a lot. And there's even more other "groups" than those obvious two.

atoav 3y ago
Does that question really matter for this discussion? Every developer will have their own flavour of what constitutes good or bad code, but independent of their flavour isn't a software engineer who doesn't believe in the possibility of achieving good code a somewhat sad thing? Imagine being a cook that doesn't believe in the possibility of cooking good food — sure what constitutes good food is a matter of discussion, but if you have a cook that doesn't believe in it that alone is remarkable in itself.
- whstl 3y ago
  It does matter because what constitutes good code for some people is often terrible code for others, to the point of people making jokes about it [1]. With food, at least there is a wider agreement of what consists of good and bad. [1] https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...
  - atoav 3y ago
    But we are talking about self-judgment here. What does it matter which flavour of good you expect your code to be if you actually don't believe good code by your definition can be realistically achieved?
    - whstl 3y ago
      I agree with the sentiment, never said anywhere that it couldn't be achieved in a personal level. Just that defining "good code" is difficult. If you narrow down "good code" to mean "good to myself" then of course it is sad that someone doesn't believe in it. On the other hand, I find that someone saying that "universally good code" is not possible as understandable. I personally believe it is only really achievable in certain domains, for some others (especially for code handling a lot of essential complexity) it is borderline impossible to not have at least some uneven corners. And there's only so much you can sweep under the carpet of indirection.

by whstl 3y ago

atoav 3y ago

Does that question really matter for this discussion? Every developer will have their own flavour of what constitutes good or bad code, but independent of their flavour isn't a software engineer who doesn't believe in the possibility of achieving good code a somewhat sad thing? Imagine being a cook that doesn't believe in the possibility of cooking good food — sure what constitutes good food is a matter of discussion, but if you have a cook that doesn't believe in it that alone is remarkable in itself.

whstl 3y ago
It does matter because what constitutes good code for some people is often terrible code for others, to the point of people making jokes about it [1]. With food, at least there is a wider agreement of what consists of good and bad. [1] https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...
- atoav 3y ago
  But we are talking about self-judgment here. What does it matter which flavour of good you expect your code to be if you actually don't believe good code by your definition can be realistically achieved?
  - whstl 3y ago
    I agree with the sentiment, never said anywhere that it couldn't be achieved in a personal level. Just that defining "good code" is difficult. If you narrow down "good code" to mean "good to myself" then of course it is sad that someone doesn't believe in it. On the other hand, I find that someone saying that "universally good code" is not possible as understandable. I personally believe it is only really achievable in certain domains, for some others (especially for code handling a lot of essential complexity) it is borderline impossible to not have at least some uneven corners. And there's only so much you can sweep under the carpet of indirection.