Re:The use of ‘class’ for things that should be simple free ...
by mojuba on Sunday May 29, 2022 @04:37AM
(#31547509)
Is it just lack of constraints though? Minimalism also guarantees improved maintainability and fewer bugs in the code. The less you write, the fewer mistakes you make, it's that simple.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The use of ‘class’ for things that should be simple free ...
by watwut on Sunday May 29, 2022 @05:46AM
(#31547853)
No, not really. Minimalism where I had seen it lead to spaghetti like hard to maintain and decipher the code. It was impossible to think about larger units, you had to juggle details of everything in head at the same time.
Re:The use of ‘class’ for things that should be simple free ...
by alphanumeric0 on Sunday May 29, 2022 @12:59PM
(#31550642)
.. that sounds like the opposite of minimalism.
Re:The use of ‘class’ for things that should be simple free ...
by eurasiantiger on Sunday May 29, 2022 @07:21AM
(#31548235)
Exactly the opposite in my experience. The worst maintainable code is usually the minimal ”prototype” or ”MVP” solution. Couple it with time pressured continuous development and you get spaghetti.
Maintainable code has sane abstractions, it wraps external dependencies, and it has minimal interfaces between them and other code. Minimal here doesn’t mean quantitatively minimal but qualitatively minimal.
Re:The use of ‘class’ for things that should be simple free ...
by mojuba on Sunday May 29, 2022 @08:37AM
(#31548655)
Spaghetti is not minimalism, it's quite the opposite. You should minimize dependencies, minimize every function, avoid repetitions, etc. What you mean by MVP that evolves into spaghetti is called "incompetence".