> Nothing clever, nothing coupled
Yes, simple is good. Simple is not always easy though. A good goal to strive for nevertheless.
> nothing DRY
That's interesting. Would you prefer all the code to be repeated in multiple places?
Yes, simple is good. Simple is not always easy though. A good goal to strive for nevertheless.
> nothing DRY
That's interesting. Would you prefer all the code to be repeated in multiple places?
Also, limit your abstractions’ external knowledge to zero.
> “I did this one thing here with data type A, and I’m doing something similar with data type B; let’s just create some abstraction for both of them!”
I'm guilty of this. I even fought hard against the people who wanted to keep the code duplicated for the different data types.
> “encapsulate behaviors that you need to synchronize.”
I like that!