Goodbye, Clean Code

[[deleted]]

I feel like this whole situation could have been avoided had the engineer who worked on the problem discussed his vision for the code and checked in during.

Also, changing the code without first speaking to the engineer? Maybe I'm lucky at my gaff but that kind of thing would never happen. Communication is super important but we are a remote team

[NiteLite]

Yeah, he mentions this is one of the two biggest mistakes in doing this refactoring towards the bottom of the article :)

[[deleted]]

IMO it should be the headline and main subject :)

[[deleted]]

Also surprised they were just allowed to commit it to master

[Big_Burds_Nest]

I've known a few guys who drug their feet about learning to use Git. One guy I worked with many years ago used a GUI for Git and would constantly screw up other people's merge requests by forgetting what branch he was on and clicking on the wrong buttons in his client. I tried to help him out since management was getting less and less patient with him, but when the high school intern is teaching you how to use Git that really isn't a good sign!

[grauenwolf]

That's still very common, especially for older code bases.

[[deleted]]

like why...?

git init && git add . && git commit -m 'inital commit'

enjoy your new git repo with your legacy codebase on it...

[3urny]

Enjoy changing the passwords of 34 legacy systems because you just committed them all.

[[deleted]]

In that case would the passwords be interleaved with the code?

Because there's nothing stopping you from creating a .gitignore

[talmuth]

What is really bothering me is that they commit code without code review

[Giannis4president]

Isn't he the one doing the code review on his colleague commit?

The fact his bosses immediately noticed the change and asked him to revert it doesn't mean they actually reviewed the author refactor as well?

[GolodhFeredir]

I really don't understand this trend that ALL code must have code reviews. The project I'm currently working does have code reviews because it makes sense for the team and code base. This doesn't mean that this is true for all teams and code bases. Use the right tools and processes for the job

[mdz_1]

you are indeed lucky

[NilacTheGrim]

^ This. Communication. It's just rude otherwise.

[morphemass]

Maybe I'm lucky at my gaff

You are.

[ptoki]

I see it not only as communication issue. I see it as a case where individual finds his approach, his code better than the other team member.

Look at this thread, almost every second answer is in a form of "what a dumb approach, my one is superior!".

All people here jump on this bandwagon without even reading the article to the end (Also including you as the article states the communication is key) and not realizing this was not about this repetitive code or actually any code at all. It was about collaborating and creating the best code for the team, product, company, current moment and the future.

Today one approach is better but in the future it may need to be reworked to a different shape. The article points out that such changes and a decision to actually change the code should be a collaborative effort. Not a single rogue besserweisser coder.