Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Writing elegant code that never works can easily take me twice as long as writing okay code that actually works.



You're phrasing that in a seductive way. "Okay code". Maybe that's good enough, right? Maybe not? Someone's "okay code" may be someone else's "bad code". I'm fixing someone else's "okay code" on a daily basis since it's riddled with bugs. Somehow I'd expect that if they would have had the mastery to write elegant code, they may also have been able to make it less buggy, or at least to make it easier for me to fix it.

Also, as with code that's elegant, or well-tested, or specified really well, aside from all those explicit qualities, all of these are also just additional touch moments for the author in question to discover and fix the bugs before it gets handed off, and to become my problem on some future date.

(Not saying you should gold-plate it into elegant code. Just saying that there is value that should not so easily be dismissed.)


I think for me, "okay code" means that it's functional, debuggable, and up to professional sniff, but nothing flashy. As opposed to sexy-cool-trendy-meta-wow code.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: