3 ms·
I really don't see how it's just "write good code." In fact the opening line is about removing code being better than writing more. Maybe it boils down to KISS
by jayd16 3y ago
I really don't see how it's just "write good code." In fact the opening line is about removing code being better than writing more.
Maybe it boils down to KISS but IMO it goes deeper than that. The lesson that code is a liability not an asset is not represented in either "be good" or "be simple."
- GMoromisato 3y agoMaybe you're right. Obviously, if this advice helps people, then I should just back off. It's true that removing code is better than adding it, and that code is a liability. And I admit that I needed to hear that early in my career. But the article acknowledges that "over-adherence to [that] dogma can be counter productive". Great--so how can I tell if I've gone too far? How do I know if I should write more code or less code? How do I know if my code is "dumb" enough? The article does not help with that. Saying that "code is a liability" is not actionable advice. Edit: In contrast, I found this article full of actionable advice: https://tidyfirst.substack.com/p/mastering-programming https://tidyfirst.substack.com/p/mastering-programming
- klabb3 3y ago> The lesson that code is a liability not an asset is not represented in either "be good" or "be simple." I think it’s an extension of simplicity. 0 lines of code is simpler than 1 line, no?
- jayd16 3y agoUsually that's true but that's not obvious to a junior dev who thinks it's their job to wrap everything in more code and scripts and patterns.