Had to work with some code I wrote a few years ago where I went maximally polymorphic for the hell of it - it was just as painful as when working with badly documented and poorly tested dynamically checked code.
Show this thread
-
This is too often a hypothetical benefit, IME, and leads us open to claims of YAGNI. I find arguments for maximal polymorphism and/or abstraction on the grounds of precision much more compelling (and more useful in practice too!) <insert-Dijkstra-quote-here>
I certainly endorse those grounds. ;) But I think that being able to claim YAGNI confidently requires a lot of experience (or reading of tea leaves). There is a cost (in terms of technical debt) of being wrong...
-
-
But surely you'll agree that the reverse is true? Being able to claim that you *will* need it when you don't need it now also requires a lot of experience, and there *is* a cost, in terms of technical debt, to having to maintain code that you don't actually need?
-
Not so much... as I said in my last (chronologically speaking; I have no idea where I am in this thread any more) tweet, I think that it's harder to write bugs in generic code.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.