Talk:You ain't gonna need it

From CSSEMediaWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Just my two cents: some arguments for YAGNI.
 
Just my two cents: some arguments for YAGNI.
  
* Nothing is more of a pain than chasing bugs in code that isn't even executing!!  
+
* Nothing is more of a pain than chasing bugs through code that isn't even executing - lots of dead ends!  
* It keeps the cognitive overhead down when looking at strange code.  
+
* It keeps the cognitive overhead down when looking at strange code. It self-documents because, by it's very existence, it honestly declares what the software actually does
 
* Dead code is not part of the integration-testing loop, so in a test-driven process, it's not valid code. It also tends to fall behind requirements.
 
* Dead code is not part of the integration-testing loop, so in a test-driven process, it's not valid code. It also tends to fall behind requirements.
* Finally, YAGNI keeps the cognitive overhead down when looking at the code. It self-documents because by it's very existence, it declares what the software actually does.
 
  
 
[[User:Lindsay | Lindsay Kay]]
 
[[User:Lindsay | Lindsay Kay]]

Latest revision as of 02:06, 6 October 2008

Added little explanation of the yagni --Dom 03:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Just my two cents: some arguments for YAGNI.

  • Nothing is more of a pain than chasing bugs through code that isn't even executing - lots of dead ends!
  • It keeps the cognitive overhead down when looking at strange code. It self-documents because, by it's very existence, it honestly declares what the software actually does
  • Dead code is not part of the integration-testing loop, so in a test-driven process, it's not valid code. It also tends to fall behind requirements.

Lindsay Kay

Personal tools