Re:Google takes the pain out of code reviews, with 97% dev s...
by JoeAltmaier on Monday December 04, 2023 @02:19PM
(#38521761)
I'd like to agree. But there is one part of that distinction that is real: there is such a thing as low quality code.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Google takes the pain out of code reviews, with 97% dev s...
by withinboredom on Monday December 04, 2023 @02:29PM
(#38521920)
I think there is a such thing as “bad code” but not low quality code. Bad code can be detected by automated tooling and be improved through simple refactoring.
Re:Google takes the pain out of code reviews, with 97% dev s...
by JoeAltmaier on Monday December 04, 2023 @05:43PM
(#38524220)
I'd say it this way: bad code doesn't robustly handle all the use cases, mis-interprets inputs sometimes, or is a mess to read and debug.
Yes, it matters what the code looks like. Knew a guy, named everything in his code a letter of the alphabet. a,b,c and when he got to z started za, zb etc.
That was 'bad code'. Or, it was 'Low Quality Code'. Nobody wants junk like that. Even if it passes tests, is robust etc.
Re:Google takes the pain out of code reviews, with 97% dev s...
by withinboredom on Monday December 04, 2023 @07:55PM
(#38525633)
> Nobody wants junk like that.
I can think of a few tools that do that to your PHP or JS code, on purpose. They even cost quite a bit of money (obfuscation). Sounds like you might have gotten a good deal there ... /s