3 ms·

> I consider Clean Code to be in the category of books/styles that is helpful for early developers who need some structure Clean Code is unhelpful to beginners

> I consider Clean Code to be in the category of books/styles that is helpful for early developers who need some structure Clean Code is unhelpful to beginners too, though: misuse of industry-standard terms, shunning of comments in favor of tiny functions with long names, shunning function arguments in favor of mutating state, polymorphism obsession, etc. So much of the concrete advice the book gives is just plain bad. The reason people get more pissed off at Clean Code than they would at any other book that gives bad advice is the preachy and authoritative tone it uses. It frames people who don't do "Clean Code" as unprofessional and lazy, and this framing is very convincing to some people, as evidenced by some of the replies in this thread.

recursivecaveat 2mo ago
The tone really is genius marketing though. Like who wants to be a "dirty" coder? Reminds me of that quote about the etymology of dynamic programming: > it's impossible to use the word dynamic in a pejorative sense. Try thinking of some combination that will possibly give it a pejorative meaning. It's impossible. Thus, I thought dynamic programming was a good name. It was something not even a Congressman could object to. So I used it as an umbrella for my activities.
win311fwg 2mo ago
> It frames people who don't do "Clean Code" as unprofessional and lazy Well, isn't that the whole reason for the profession? If you want to be professional and hardworking, why are you instructing a computer to do your work for you? If you aren't being unprofessional and lazy, you're in the wrong business.
- cestith 2mo ago
  Larry Wall said the three virtues of a programmer are laziness, impatience, and hubris. He meant when properly applied, of course.
antonymoose 2mo ago
I would charitably say that it’s a function of a different time and place in programming. The way you write “Clean COBOL,” “Clean Java 6/J2EE,” and “Clean Rust” are all going to be very different. There is still good meat-on-the-bone in the book, and especially interesting if you’re working in a legacy system from that older time and place.
- RaftPeople 2mo ago
  > I would charitably say that it’s a function of a different time and place in programming. I really think it was just one persons opinion that got published. I started in the 80's and at each software company I worked at they had standard styles that I think we're very clean and organized without being overly dogmatic in any one direction.
  - 9rx 2mo ago
    > I really think it was just one persons opinion that got published. What alternative is there? Obviously very few of the ideas in the book were conceived of by Uncle Bob himself, but his editorial opinion is what chose which ideas to include. If that weren't the case, his name wouldn't be on the book.
- win311fwg 2mo ago
  Not to mention that "Clean Code" is from the era where many developers were still sticking MySQL calls into the middle of their HTML. It was trying to wrangle an audience that didn't put any real thought into code, trying to convince them that they should. That is an audience that doesn't meaningfully exist now. While there are still disagreements on exactly what the code should look like, most everyone now agrees that it is something worth thinking about, in large part because of efforts like "Clean Code" putting bugs in ears. It isn't what you would write today, but it wasn't written today. Without fail, if a developer is "pissed off", it is because they are judging something from the past by ignoring the conditions of the past.

recursivecaveat 2mo ago

The tone really is genius marketing though. Like who wants to be a "dirty" coder? Reminds me of that quote about the etymology of dynamic programming: > it's impossible to use the word dynamic in a pejorative sense. Try thinking of some combination that will possibly give it a pejorative meaning. It's impossible. Thus, I thought dynamic programming was a good name. It was something not even a Congressman could object to. So I used it as an umbrella for my activities.

win311fwg 2mo ago

> It frames people who don't do "Clean Code" as unprofessional and lazy Well, isn't that the whole reason for the profession? If you want to be professional and hardworking, why are you instructing a computer to do your work for you? If you aren't being unprofessional and lazy, you're in the wrong business.

cestith 2mo ago
Larry Wall said the three virtues of a programmer are laziness, impatience, and hubris. He meant when properly applied, of course.

antonymoose 2mo ago

I would charitably say that it’s a function of a different time and place in programming. The way you write “Clean COBOL,” “Clean Java 6/J2EE,” and “Clean Rust” are all going to be very different. There is still good meat-on-the-bone in the book, and especially interesting if you’re working in a legacy system from that older time and place.

RaftPeople 2mo ago
> I would charitably say that it’s a function of a different time and place in programming. I really think it was just one persons opinion that got published. I started in the 80's and at each software company I worked at they had standard styles that I think we're very clean and organized without being overly dogmatic in any one direction.
- 9rx 2mo ago
  > I really think it was just one persons opinion that got published. What alternative is there? Obviously very few of the ideas in the book were conceived of by Uncle Bob himself, but his editorial opinion is what chose which ideas to include. If that weren't the case, his name wouldn't be on the book.
win311fwg 2mo ago
Not to mention that "Clean Code" is from the era where many developers were still sticking MySQL calls into the middle of their HTML. It was trying to wrangle an audience that didn't put any real thought into code, trying to convince them that they should. That is an audience that doesn't meaningfully exist now. While there are still disagreements on exactly what the code should look like, most everyone now agrees that it is something worth thinking about, in large part because of efforts like "Clean Code" putting bugs in ears. It isn't what you would write today, but it wasn't written today. Without fail, if a developer is "pissed off", it is because they are judging something from the past by ignoring the conditions of the past.