News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Good Design is Imperfect Design, Part 1: Honest Names. Parent comment

Re:Good Design is Imperfect Design, Part 1: Honest Names by ericevans on Wednesday August 04, 2021 @05:29PM (#28066606)
Okay, I almost wish I hadn't read this comment because it is so similar to what I have in part 2! So please don't be annoyed when you see it in a couple of weeks ;-)

I actually separated it into a separate part because it undermines my primary point. Sure, we all love it when we have a better decomposition, better names, and everything falls into place. But it doesn't always. Not in the time we have. So then we need ways to deal with the flaws. I decided that if I had ended with this it would have communicated: Aw, just keep trying and you'll get something nice! That can be very risky.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Good Design is Imperfect Design, Part 1: Honest Names by ExtraE on Thursday August 05, 2021 @09:51AM (#28073723)
Heh. You didn’t have a perfect example but you went with what you had and shipped.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Good Design is Imperfect Design, Part 1: Honest Names by stickfigure on Wednesday August 04, 2021 @06:02PM (#28067008)
The only thing advanceBy has going for it is that when the programmer inevitably tries to type add (after wondering why plus turns up nothing), the IDE _might_ show it in a dropdown.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Good Design is Imperfect Design, Part 1: Honest Names by bottled_poe on Wednesday August 04, 2021 @06:36PM (#28067336)
Ok, but that’s when you read the docs. Also, in many languages, those expected methods could be mocked out to raise compiler errors, redirecting the developer to the correct methods.
[ Parent | on HN ]