I don’t entirely subscribe to the first paragraph – I’ve never worked at a place so dear to me that spurred me to spend time thinking about its architecture (beyond the usual rants). Other than that, spot on

  • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    For instance I see this a lot in DRY code.

    DRY is one of the most misunderstood practices. If you read pragmatic programmer (where DRY was coined), they make it clear that DRY doesn’t mean “avoid all repetition at all cost”. Just because two pieces of code look identical doesn’t necessarily mean they are the same. If they can grow independently of each other, then they’re not repetitions according to DRY and should be left alone.

    • nous@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yup, and that is because people only ever lean DRY coding by its name. It is never really what it originally meant, when to use it and more importantly when not to use it. So loads of people apply it religiously and over use it. This is true of all the popular catchy named methodologies/principals etc.