• aport@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    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
      0
      ·
      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
        2
        ·
        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.