• aport@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think vzq’s point is that you can write good, readable code that doesn’t do what the user wants. Same with other metrics that are ripe for navel-gazing like code coverage.

    It’s bordering on a false dichotomy… but I also believe that dynamic, untyped languages have proven exceptionally useful for rapid prototyping and iteration.

    • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I must admit that I write that deliberately to annoy the “code quality is everything” brigade.

      I have no issues prioritizing maintainability where needed, but in my experience people that dogmatically prioritize code quality are not honest with themselves. They almost never chase code quality in general. They are always looking to enforce some burdensome standard or specific tool or archaic process or fiddly CICD script, and if you push back they go cry in a corner about the abstract virtue of “code quality”.

      Just be straight with me. You enjoy using type script. Tell me how it adds value to the product and the customer.

      Stop trying to shame me into it. I can’t be shamed. I have no shame. I’m a professional software engineer.

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re setting up a theoretically boogie man that no one said exists and then setup the extreme opposite point of view. You’re annoying the people that are actually sane. You’re being dogmatic in your one views and too extreme.

            • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s a business decision. Why would for example an app that’s only needed for a 24 hour event need to be maintainable?

              Sometimes it’s ok to take the money and run. Feel free to make your case, but it’s not a developer’s call to make.

              • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                That sounds like bad business. No application is 100% unique in everything. Code reuse saves time. If you are unable to bring anything from one app to another, you’re doing it wrong.

                Let me guess though, I was right. You’re a manager not a developer.

                • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re a manager not a developer.

                  You’re wrong. But the fact that you live this dichotomy so deeply is not a great sign.

                  • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    ? I mentioned it twice. And you sounded like a manager a little bit in one comment, and then a lot in the followup reply to it. To the point it sounded like you were defending it. Making claims that developers aren’t allowed to make the choice you were saying to make. So it was really weird. I don’t even know how your stance makes sense from your point of view.

                    Edit: and thanks for ignoring anything of actual value to reply to.

    • pitbuster@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      but I also believe that dynamic, untyped languages have proven exceptionally useful for rapid prototyping and iteration.

      Except that prototypes never end up as just prototypes, they die or become the real app with lots of masking tape.