Sometimes, you really are just holding it wrong.
Should the OP have written a manuscript to make you feel better? In your mind, should a long, drawn out article only be refuted by something of similar length?
Should the OP have written a manuscript to make you feel better? In your mind, should a long, drawn out article only be refuted by something of similar length?
Nope
> only be refuted by something of similar length?
No, but if you don't address the points that have been made, you're not refuting. The comment says "refactor your codebase to put the related code together", but the article already addresses some downsides to this approach.
Does the commenter believe that those downsides are more avoidable than the article states? Or maybe they believe the downsides are dwarfed by the upsides? Or maybe something else. We don't know, so we can't evaluate the position effectively.
Yup. We all are. This is only a problem because editing raw plaintext code as single source of truth is a bad idea, and we're reaching its limits. "Split or don't split" is one of many holy wars that can't be solved, because they happen on the Pareto frontier. The only way to move forward is to accept that different coding tasks need different representations, and the computer should synthesize them for us, and we generally should not touch the underlying single source of truth, anymore than we manually poke in assembly files generated by our compilers.
The alternative to plain text is programming-language specific version control and source code formats, and managing codebases using some external database tool, or something similar. It also means you can't easily interoperate with existing plain text code.
I predict the only way people will switch is if there's some overwhelming competitive advantage in storing code as something other than text files, to the point where business competitors will go bankrupt from not upgrading technologies. And then the open source community will adopt it after the industry does.
It’s a shallow criticism by HN standards.
It's not about "feeling better"? It's that the comment is very dismissive and sums up to "just refactor". Advice of "just refactor" (or "just do x") is lazy and ignores all context.
> Refactor your codebase to put the related code together, and then this "problem" will disappear
But how do I do that exactly? What does this even mean? I could literally put the whole codebase into one file since it is all related somehow or another.