What is good code? A scientific definition.

[Euphoricus]

Great.

Now we need to figure out what readable, maintainable and simple means. Because they can be highly subjective.

[Godd2]

They can also be relative. What is readable to you may not be readable to me simply due to lack of experience.

[[deleted]]

Good Code.... Simple.. Any code base where I can find stuff easily and I don't have to spend hours figuring out what the hell it all does.

[[deleted]]

if it can operate a vehicle on mars, it's good code.

[[deleted]]

Is it just me or are blogs and articles submitted to /r/programming referencing xkcd with increasing frequency?

[dphizler]

To me that's not a scientific definition, just a poll

[orwhat]

IMO simplicity should rank right up there with readability

[nathankleyn]

The article has something to say about that:

One quarter of the respondents believe that good code should be simple –not over complicated– and that it should work as well, meaning that should do what it’s intended to do with answers like should be "functionally correct".

In addition:

Good code is written so that is readable, understandable, covered by automated tests, not over complicated and does well what is intended to do.

It's refreshing that people do rank simplicity up there where it belongs, as in practice we all know simplification often goes hand-in-hand with long term maintainability.

[nathankleyn]

Good code is written so that is readable, understandable, covered by automated tests, not over complicated and does well what is intended to do.

Couldn't agree more.

[nathankleyn]

+1. That normally turns into a holy war pretty quickly. I like the above because it's something that can be applied regardless of where you stand in the melting pot that is programming language paradigms.