4 ms·
This seems precisely backward to me. Programmers are humans, not input/output machines, and there's definitely a role for encouraging a certain standard of judg
by tunesmith 3y ago
This seems precisely backward to me. Programmers are humans, not input/output machines, and there's definitely a role for encouraging a certain standard of judgment that doesn't require tooling to enforce. To argue otherwise seems akin to arguing that any bad behavior is fine that isn't explicitly banned in paragraph 5 subsection D. Tooling is expensive, especially for smaller teams, and should be saved for phenomena that hit the cost/benefit calculations squarely.
- zeroCalories 3y agoI agree that sometimes the cost/benefit analysis doesn't make sense for adding tools, but I would argue that in many of those cases the benefit of your nitpicking isn't worth it either, so just don't say anything so that we can focus on the important parts of the code. Of course people will sometimes do some really silly stuff that couldn't realistically be checked, so I would hope that less important stuff gets put aside so we can focus on the real issues.