codeinabox@programming.dev to Programming@programming.devEnglish · 1 day agoAI and the age of probabilistic programmingwww.abrahammarinperez.comexternal-linkmessage-square10fedilinkarrow-up125arrow-down117
arrow-up18arrow-down1external-linkAI and the age of probabilistic programmingwww.abrahammarinperez.comcodeinabox@programming.dev to Programming@programming.devEnglish · 1 day agomessage-square10fedilink
minus-squarekilleronthecorner@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3arrow-down2·edit-21 day agoWhat if we don’t define code quality in terms of the aesthetics of that code? Why is the perception of code quality so important prior to that code ever having been executed? How can we test our code? What does it’s testability tell us? What do it’s tests tell us? Is our test code good quality? Does it need to be? How can we know it is? Is it’s quality measured by the same metrics as the code it is testing? ‘Clean Code’ by Uncle Bob is a good place to start when answering these questions.
minus-squarelad@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5arrow-down1·17 hours ago ‘Clean Code’ by Uncle Bob is a good place to start when answering these questions. And here I was, almost agreeing. Clean code is defining quality through aesthetics, and that book is a very bad advice of how to define anything
minus-squarekilleronthecorner@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·16 hours agoThat’s a very narrow definition of the contents of the book.
What if we don’t define code quality in terms of the aesthetics of that code?
Why is the perception of code quality so important prior to that code ever having been executed?
How can we test our code? What does it’s testability tell us? What do it’s tests tell us?
Is our test code good quality? Does it need to be? How can we know it is? Is it’s quality measured by the same metrics as the code it is testing?
‘Clean Code’ by Uncle Bob is a good place to start when answering these questions.
And here I was, almost agreeing. Clean code is defining quality through aesthetics, and that book is a very bad advice of how to define anything
That’s a very narrow definition of the contents of the book.