• SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    I used to work with a guy who insisted his code was self explanatory, and then he’d nest loops 5 levels deep and give variables names like “thingyOne”.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Namely, the first one. Next you’re going to ask about thingySixtyNine or thingyOneHundredTwentyTwo, I suppose?

        • dankm@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I wonder if there’s a warning for that in Clang or GCC. That seems like something I’d want, but also want it to be 100% opt-in. Not even enabled with -Wall or -Wextra.

    • fred@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      That guy wasn’t in charge, I hope? That would not have passed code review with me at least.

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I worked with a guy who was smart but “useless smart”. He was convinced that “code is self descriptive”, that is comments are not needed because the code speaks for itself. Well that is like saying DNA is self descriptive. Yes, I can sit there tracing the code, tracking the variables, etc or you could make a small effort to describe what is happening instead and save me a lot of time and risk missing subtle points.