3 ms·
I guess all we know is there were 2K lines of code and the commenter thinks that was the right way to do it. It would be necessary to see the code to appropriat
by osigurdson 3y ago
I guess all we know is there were 2K lines of code and the commenter thinks that was the right way to do it. It would be necessary to see the code to appropriately critique it.
- goatlover 3y agoNot just the commenter, but his team as well. It passed code review with flying colors, apparently. The moral of the story is that there always exceptions and developers should not be ideologically committed to one approach above all else.
- em-bee 3y agowe know more than that: You could argue that every one of those 9 scopes could be a separate function, but then devs would be tempted to reuse them. Yet, each step had subtle assumptions about what happened before. what we don't know is if it would have been possible to abstract those assumptions away so that functions could have been defined without them.
- osigurdson 3y agoEven the contrived example in the post can be factored differently (and better imo). How do we know those 9 scopes are appropriate?
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoWe do know that if we trust the poster, they said very clearly it could have been done but they didn't consider the value to outweigh the downsides.
- em-bee 3y agoyes, i meant we don't know if it would have been possible to extract functions in such a way that they are actually safely reusable.