3 ms·
> 'better' Might I suggest that whilst it's great to get to completion pretty quickly and have many completed mini-projects under one's belt, that there might
by tekacs 13y ago
> 'better'
Might I suggest that whilst it's great to get to completion pretty quickly and have many completed mini-projects under one's belt, that there might be some value in younger programmers choosing the untenable-but-beautiful approach to the codebase in order to learn some more about ways that they could build such architectures?
Whilst in the long term (and when working with others) it seems almost always best to go with a codebase which balances well simplicity and expressiveness (no point using Python like Java!) mightn't it be valuable experience, being able to work freely on those mini-projects when younger and without the burden of having to design for those goals of simplicity?
- kleiba 13y agoWell, I guess since it's one's own project you can do whatever you want with it! And I think your point is fair: there's certainly merit in training oneself to write "beautiful" code. But I guess then your goal is simply different, your focus would be on improving your architectural skills rather than finishing the project. There's nothing wrong with that. And of course if you can manage to reach both goals at the same time, you win double.