Why is simple so difficult? was a goldfish-bowl discussion facilitated by Nat Pryce and Jonathan Clarke. It was an energetic session with people pinging in and out of the bowl at a rate of knots. Here's some of the things that were said:
Simplicity emerges. We should be saying - have the simplest thing, not do the simplest thing.
Dan North said simplicity is clarity of intent. How clearly can I express intent? If redundant code supports clarity then I'm ok with that. I like 'clarity of intent' as a definition for simplicity.
Steve Freeman said code is an aesthetic experience as well as a technical experience. If code isn't simple it'll suck the life out of you. As craftsmen there is a sense of pride we take in writing simple code.
Someone asked - should we be talking about least complexity rather than simplicity?
It isn't good to be fastidiously tidy. If the code is pristine you don't want to touch it for fear of breaking a work of art. A little mess is therefore a good thing.
Accidental complexity is a natural by-product of developing software. We're very good at creating this tacitly.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment