4 ms·

Good point, but how do you keep up code quality in the code base with standardization? Edit: without* standardization

by cmpb 11y ago

barrkel 11y ago
I'm assuming you mean without standardization? Pair programming, code review, and actively refactoring code to use existing abstractions or build new abstractions when it appears that the same problem is cropping up in a situation that might warrant copy / paste / modify. It might be possible that a couple of different abstractions / patterns crop up that solve the same underlying problem. It usually isn't a problem for them to coexist for a while until one proves better. Sometimes they evolve in different directions; sometimes the people most responsible for the respective abstractions agree between them what synthesis should win going forward. I'm just worried about giving too much ammo to a certain type of code lawyer, who likes to quote chapter and verse and gets a kick out of being technically correct. You find these kinds of people everywhere, on Wikipedia, increasingly on StackOverflow, etc., and I think they can create a bit of a poisonous culture if they have too much law to enforce. There is a place for some low-level standards, don't get me wrong, but it can get out of hand.
- gutnor 11y ago
  I agree with you in the following scenario: small team (<20 dev), manageable codebase size (~ 200K line), and enough budget to keep the project running without too much specialization. If you cannot keep the project within those parameters, code nazi is unfortunately the way to go. For most people on HN that should be another day at work, for entreprise backoffice system developers like me, that's a rare sight. And in any case it all breaks down without great communication between team members and compatible code culture (i.e. there is some way for the whole team to agree on something and apply it without childish guerrilla resistance )

Good point, but how do you keep up code quality in the code base with standardization? Edit: without* standardization

by cmpb 11y ago

Good point, but how do you keep up code quality in the code base with standardization? Edit: without* standardization

I'm assuming you mean without standardization? Pair programming, code review, and actively refactoring code to use existing abstractions or build new abstractions when it appears that the same problem is cropping up in a situation that might warrant copy / paste / modify. It might be possible that a couple of different abstractions / patterns crop up that solve the same underlying problem. It usually isn't a problem for them to coexist for a while until one proves better. Sometimes they evolve in different directions; sometimes the people most responsible for the respective abstractions agree between them what synthesis should win going forward. I'm just worried about giving too much ammo to a certain type of code lawyer, who likes to quote chapter and verse and gets a kick out of being technically correct. You find these kinds of people everywhere, on Wikipedia, increasingly on StackOverflow, etc., and I think they can create a bit of a poisonous culture if they have too much law to enforce. There is a place for some low-level standards, don't get me wrong, but it can get out of hand.

gutnor 11y ago
I agree with you in the following scenario: small team (<20 dev), manageable codebase size (~ 200K line), and enough budget to keep the project running without too much specialization. If you cannot keep the project within those parameters, code nazi is unfortunately the way to go. For most people on HN that should be another day at work, for entreprise backoffice system developers like me, that's a rare sight. And in any case it all breaks down without great communication between team members and compatible code culture (i.e. there is some way for the whole team to agree on something and apply it without childish guerrilla resistance )