Ancestors

Toot

Written by Henrik Jernevad on 2024-09-17 at 05:32

The best design does what it needs to, and no more.

https://henko.net/blog/when-nothing-can-be-removed/

[#]programming #simplicity

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from henrikjernevad@mastodon.social

Descendants

Written by selmaohneh on 2024-09-17 at 06:29

@henrikjernevad This heavily relates to TDD. When you only add functionality you really need, proved by a failing test, you'll end up with a system such as you described. Any removal of production code will result in a red test suite / broken business logic.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from selmaohneh@mastodon.social

Written by Henrik Jernevad on 2024-09-17 at 06:33

@selmaohneh Very true! 👍 That is one of many benefits of TDD.

(Though I think the topic of the blog post applies at the design level and not just implementation. "Do you really need the feature you were about to write a test for?")

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from henrikjernevad@mastodon.social

Written by glyn on 2024-09-17 at 07:05

@selmaohneh @henrikjernevad Also "what it needs to do" is partly a requirements question. I've sometimes found that getting a deeper understanding of the requirements helps me find a simpler/smaller solution. I personally like building up a mathematical model of the requirements, e.g. by writing a formal spec, especially when an informal description of the spec seems over-complicated or somewhat arbitrary.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from underlap@fosstodon.org

Written by glyn on 2024-09-17 at 07:18

@selmaohneh @henrikjernevad Other times, building a rough prototype is a good way to understand the requirements better, although there is a risk of implementing the presenting requirements, complete with arbitrary/unnecessary behaviour.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from underlap@fosstodon.org

Written by glyn on 2024-09-17 at 07:21

@selmaohneh @henrikjernevad I guess the requirements side is especially flexible when working on a component whose users are other components which are also being developed from scratch. There's then the opportunity to "shuffle" responsibilities around to try to discover a set of components where each is minimal in the sense we are discussing.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from underlap@fosstodon.org

Written by Henrik Jernevad on 2024-09-17 at 07:39

@underlap @selmaohneh I agree! The "no unnecessary parts" idea needs to be applied on all levels. And there are so many levels where one may intentionally or unintentionally add unnecessary stuff.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from henrikjernevad@mastodon.social