21–27 of 27 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yagni is a duality though (like a trinity, but two). You've just met Yagni's other face, You Are Going To Need It.
An important corollary to this is "0, 1, many". Any time you are storing data, the acceptable number of items to handle are none, exactly one, or a number limited only by machine resources. Don't design a container to hold, say, up to 5 items.
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." This is brilliant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An important corollary to this is "0, 1, many". Any time you are storing data, the acceptable number of items to handle are none, exactly one, or a number limited only by machine resources. Don't design a container to hold, say, up to 5 items.
I don't understand. I would just about never want to use an unbounded buffer, for example, for a channel.
This is superb. YAGNI may have it's own Wikipedia entry, but that doesn't mean that we remember it when a brilliant idea comes to mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_aren%27t_gonna_need_it
All hail YAGNI, the god of code.
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." This is brilliant.
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." This is brilliant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yagni is a duality though (like a trinity, but two). You've just met Yagni's other face, You Are Going To Need It.
An important corollary to this is "0, 1, many". Any time you are storing data, the acceptable number of items to handle are none, exactly one, or a number limited only by machine resources. Don't design a container to hold, say, up to 5 items.