Re:Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practi...
by ScottBurson on Sunday August 28, 2016 @07:45PM
(#12379109)
For ages now, I've been telling people that the best best code, produced by the most experienced people, tends to look like novice code that happens to work --- no unnecessary abstractions, limited anticipated extensibility points, encapsulation only where it makes sense.
I love this.
"Perfection is reached, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Have to disagree a little on getters and setters though. They're tremendously useful as places to set breakpoints when debugging. Well, setters are, anyway; I guess it's rarer that I'll use a getter for that. Anyway, perhaps we can agree that the need for these is a design flaw in Java; C# has a better way.
I love this.
"Perfection is reached, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Have to disagree a little on getters and setters though. They're tremendously useful as places to set breakpoints when debugging. Well, setters are, anyway; I guess it's rarer that I'll use a getter for that. Anyway, perhaps we can agree that the need for these is a design flaw in Java; C# has a better way.