Clean Code vs. A Philosophy Of Software Design

Re:Clean Code vs. A Philosophy Of Software Design by ninetyninenine on Tuesday February 25, 2025 @11:42AM (#43174176)

Then split it. All pure functions are easily decomposed into the most primitive units so even the most dogmatic ass hole can't talk shit.

   createSpecialString = createFormattedString . createNewString

   createFormattedString = 
       Capitalizefirstletter .
       MakealllowerCase .
       AddNumberSuffix .


   createNewString(y) = 
       removeLetterA .
       removeLetterB .
       ConcatwithWord(x)

Or put it all on one line.

      createspecialString(y) = Capitalizefirstletter . MakealllowerCase . AddNumberSuffix . removeLetterA . removeLetterB . ConcatwithWord(x)

The amount of lines becomes off topic once you get into this style. It's a completely orthoganol concept as it's completely irrelevant to readability and modularity.

Lines doesn't makes sense for pure non imperative functions. Lines ONLY make sense for imperative functions because each line represents an instruction.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Clean Code vs. A Philosophy Of Software Design by TeMPOraL on Tuesday February 25, 2025 @06:17PM (#43178784)

Well, the most interesting thing about purely functional composition would be the ability to un(de)compose them, inlining the bodies until the resulting function is large enough to be worth the effort of reading it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Clean Code vs. A Philosophy Of Software Design by ninetyninenine on Tuesday February 25, 2025 @10:06PM (#43180161)

Exactly you have the lowest level primitives. You can arbitrarily compose them however you want forming arbitrary layers of abstraction from a tree of compositions.

In the first example there is one layer. In the second there is 2 layers of abstraction formed by composing the primitives into a tree.

[ Parent | on HN ]