"Clean code looks like it was written by someone who cares" that's always resonated with my the most. Even if I didn't know what I was doing, or I didn't have a specific design pattern down, I always wanted it to be a welcoming experience to come back to at any time.
When I worked in a startup, the other programmers remarked at how "neat" and "easy to understand" my code was. I mean, I'm a cynical old dude, too, but it *is* possible to write code in the care of others.... and to have them notice.
Clean code is in viewer's eyes but I'd say it should not invoke the "fight or flight" feeling. Ie: 1. It's not repulsive. 2. You feel minimal to none desire to add or change something about it.
it's funny that SW companies have raised the bar so high at job interviews, with 3 or more rounds of interviews, and live coding exercises and sh**, and yet, we have veterans in the SW industry like yourself who have failed to see clean code. It's almost as if the SW hiring process was broken. The owner of the "the internet of bugs" YT channel has even more XP than you and he says he has yet to see evidence that someone who passed those silly types of interviews end up being better programmers.
@@johnsmith-ro2tw the interview process is indeed rotten, and yet people are saying that if Google is following it then it should be the best one for anyone out there. Funny world we live in.
Here's my definition of clean code 1:55 in: Clean code is code that does not fall apart, cease to work or cease to be intelligible or modifiable the moment some dirt gets thrown on it.
"You may think that your job is to get code to work, that's not your job, that's half of your job, and it's the least important half." This statement seems so detached from the reality that exists when you just think about code. Your job is quite literally to write something that works and brings immediate value. Would love to see a company manager that tells you to go ahead and refactor your code for a month to get it into a state where it's more readable for the next person.
I dislike the term "clean code" for the same reason I dislike the term "best practices". It tends to espouse one's opinion as moral virtue. Instead of using such terms, I would prefer people spoke more along the lines of, "In my experience, here are patterns made my work experience more difficult, and here are patterns that made my work easier." That said, if I were to promote a version of "clean code", I would say, "Is it easy to read? Is it easy to debug? Is it easy to change? If so, then it is fair to say it is clean." Another way to phrase it is along the lines of the "Golden Rule": write code for others, as you would have others write code for you.
@@CounterFragger see the glass as half-filled. He just saves few CPU cycles by writing obfuscated code, and you're making fun of his code obfuscation and deobfuscation skills? Unfair!?
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"Clean code looks like it was written by someone who cares" that's always resonated with my the most. Even if I didn't know what I was doing, or I didn't have a specific design pattern down, I always wanted it to be a welcoming experience to come back to at any time.
Clean code is that which causes the fewest number of WTFs/minute when read 🤣
Not "the fewest". Zero WTF/minute.
@@jarlfenrir I dont think you code
Classic meme
@@riten I don't think you've watched the video
Isn't this included in his book 'Clean Code' in form of a comic?
When I worked in a startup, the other programmers remarked at how "neat" and "easy to understand" my code was. I mean, I'm a cynical old dude, too, but it *is* possible to write code in the care of others.... and to have them notice.
Clean code is in viewer's eyes but I'd say it should not invoke the "fight or flight" feeling. Ie:
1. It's not repulsive.
2. You feel minimal to none desire to add or change something about it.
Clean code is something I have yet to witness in my 17 years as a software developer. For me it is almost a myth or legend at this point.
it's funny that SW companies have raised the bar so high at job interviews, with 3 or more rounds of interviews, and live coding exercises and sh**, and yet, we have veterans in the SW industry like yourself who have failed to see clean code. It's almost as if the SW hiring process was broken.
The owner of the "the internet of bugs" YT channel has even more XP than you and he says he has yet to see evidence that someone who passed those silly types of interviews end up being better programmers.
@@johnsmith-ro2tw the interview process is indeed rotten, and yet people are saying that if Google is following it then it should be the best one for anyone out there.
Funny world we live in.
I always say, code should tell a story.
Here's my definition of clean code 1:55 in: Clean code is code that does not fall apart, cease to work or cease to be intelligible or modifiable the moment some dirt gets thrown on it.
In Python you can avoid loop duplication by defining a generator. More elegant and easier to use than passing a lambda argument.
"You may think that your job is to get code to work, that's not your job, that's half of your job, and it's the least important half."
This statement seems so detached from the reality that exists when you just think about code.
Your job is quite literally to write something that works and brings immediate value.
Would love to see a company manager that tells you to go ahead and refactor your code for a month to get it into a state where it's more readable for the next person.
Hemingway's "Old Man and the Sea" should be everyone"s model for clean code.
Explane please
@@isuckatthisgame Concise, to the point, nothing unneeded to tell the story.
@@GordonRoland thank you. 🤙
CLEAN CODE IS CODE I CAN READ.
Well, I got the idea but good luck fulfilling everyones expectations.
I like to close my eyes and pretend its Vizzini from princess bride talking
I dislike the term "clean code" for the same reason I dislike the term "best practices". It tends to espouse one's opinion as moral virtue. Instead of using such terms, I would prefer people spoke more along the lines of, "In my experience, here are patterns made my work experience more difficult, and here are patterns that made my work easier."
That said, if I were to promote a version of "clean code", I would say, "Is it easy to read? Is it easy to debug? Is it easy to change? If so, then it is fair to say it is clean." Another way to phrase it is along the lines of the "Golden Rule": write code for others, as you would have others write code for you.
Clean code is code that doesn't raise you mythos score...
Code is for humans.
If it was for the computer, then all code would be machine code.
Code is for humans. Please write code like you understand that.
Well said
If I wrote it? Clean. If I inherited it, not so much.
The code itself is a MacGuffin.
There's a third option, although technically a combination of the first two. You wrote the code, then came back to it half a year later.
Fisrt
uncle bob sucks
Why ? Because you use to write unreadable code ?
as in „the vacuum cleaner of software engineering“ keep on sucking bob! keep on sucking!
@@CounterFragger see the glass as half-filled. He just saves few CPU cycles by writing obfuscated code, and you're making fun of his code obfuscation and deobfuscation skills? Unfair!?