3 ms·
DRY should be an option. Results may vary and depend on the code in question as well as the language you are using. We - a former team a couple of years ago u
by _the_inflator 3y ago
DRY should be an option.
Results may vary and depend on the code in question as well as the language you are using.
We - a former team a couple of years ago using Java - started to duplicate code in Java, because we were totally tired of interface'ing and class'ing everything away that was not DRY. It became to tedious to bloat code with them as well as understanding whole classes when all you got was references to other interfaces etc.
If there is a small service architecture like in Angular with TypeScript, abstracting away becomes fun and useful.
It all depends. But what I really do not miss is the pile of interfaces in Java and C#. These became so tough to grasp and entangled, that we DRY'ed this cesspool. DRY on DRY so to say.
- switchbak 3y agoSo your issue was with the nature of the language and the size of the project more than the application of DRY? I think I see what you're getting at, but I've certainly also seen very large Java projects that are simple at a high level and composed in such a way that they're still legible without a ton of duplication. These might be somewhat orthogonal concepts.