What is good code?

[CPallini]

Espen Harlinn wrote:

Basicly coding is design work, and can be seen as the last iteration of the whole design process.

Yes it can seen like that. Simply I don't see it like that.

Veni, vidi, vici.

[Espen Harlinn]

CPallini wrote:

Yes it can seen like that. Simply I don't see it like that.

Most people don't - personally I think it would be a good thing if they did.

Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS My LinkedIn Profile

[Single Step Debugger]

Good code is a little code. If I see you’ve achieved the goal with minimum efforts in coding and maximum in thinking, for me you’re okay and I’ll be glad to work with you.

There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

[Gary R Wheeler]

Thanks, Chris. After 30 years doing a job, and making and cleaning up a fair share of messes, you figure a few things out.

Software Zen: delete this;

[TheGreatAndPowerfulOz]

Good code follows these 4 principles: 1. It works and gets the job done. 2. It is the least code that will do the job and no more. 3. It is efficient and performant. 4. It is easy to maintain and extend. These are all things that any programmer worth his salt can do for himself. If you can't ensure your code follows these simple principles then get a different profession.

If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun

[AspDotNetDev]

Some people seem to be confusing what good code is and what a good developer is. They're not the same thing. A good developer has no problem writing substandard code. If it's a prototype, they might consider writing substandard code. Good code may be written by a bad developer (or a good developer making a bad decision). The code could be a shining example of excellence, but if it took too long and wasted an employer's time, it was a bad decision to write it so well. If the code isn't in source control, that's a bad decision for good code. As far as good code goes, that can vary based on context, but even some of the rules for contextually good code can be generalized:

1. Code in the same style as the rest of the code base.
2. The above can have exceptions. If you have a new code file and the rest of the code base has crap style, code your file in a better style to set a good example.
3. Don't waste CPU cycles. Don't waste memory.
4. Waste CPU cycles and memory when it will make the code much more clear or faster to write.
5. Some code lives longer or is more widely used than other code. That code should have higher quality.
6. Avoid security vulnerabilities (e.g., SQL injection).
7. Code that makes use of other good code rather than reinventing the wheel is good code.
8. As a corollary, avoid copy/paste code.
9. Patterns are good, except when they're not. If the cost of the complexity is greater than the benefit it adds, it's not good.
10. Code should be written to adapt to likely change. If you think a feature will be added later, leave room for it to be added without making it a breaking change.

The list could go on and on and vary significantly depending on context.

Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

[realJSOP]

When you're on a tight schedule, if it was what it's supposed to do, it's "good" code. You guys are merely being pedantic, and are ignoring (or ignorant of) the realities of real-world development...

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997

[Nueman]

My users wear guns to work. I am still here. Therefore I write good code. Q.E.D ;P

What me worry?

[Slacker007]

Your points are well made but I don't think you understood the point of my question. Some of the members who responded to my question, understood what I was trying to get to. Your list of 1-10 is what seems correct...for you. However, I don't agree with most of your list as criteria for good code. Does this mean I'm right? Of course not. Therein lies my point.

"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)

[Slacker007]

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

When you're on a tight schedule, if it was what it's supposed to do, it's "good" code.
 
You guys are merely being pedantic, and are ignoring (or ignorant of) the realities of real-world development...

well said.

"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)

[AspDotNetDev]

Your question and assertion seem to be based around the fact that good code is not knowable. This is much like the philosophical argument that right and wrong are subjective and any objective determination cannot be made. I largely agree with those concepts, however I also question the necessity of finding objective determinations of what is good/right/wrong/etc. Such an answer really only has relevance among sentient beings such as humans. The quality of code especially so (not too many platypodes care about the style of brackets you use). And code quality will be relevant to certain humans more than others. There are many dimensions to relevance you could use to judge code quality. For one, a customer probably cares most about how well the code functions (e.g., that it is bug free). However, customers can be pretty ignorant, so they may be unable to judge that code is future-proof, which saves them money (even if they are unaware of it). Then there is your boss. He might care most about getting things done in a timely manner. From his perspective, getting things done fast makes you a quality coder, but whether that means your code is good or not depends on the perspective. From your collegue who was educated with 3 PhD's, maybe your code doesn't look as pristine as she'd like. However, your practical nature might conclude that pristine code is a waste of time, or you might have a different idea of what pristine code looks like. Much like morality, judgement of good or bad depends on the perspective, and that perspective can vary depending on how you want to select a group. You may be right that there is no objective measure of good code. However, that does not mean that, say, the .Net community does not have a few guidelines. And I'd also add that the larger your group is from which you are considering a perspective, the more generic you can be in declaring rules for quality. There may be some absolutes from the widest perspective (all humans), but by that time they may be so generic as to be useless to you on a specific level. So I guess this is really a bigger discussion. One that probably wouldn't be resolved any sooner than the "right" philosophy is achieved. :)

Thou mewling ill-breeding pignut!

[Lost User]

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

ignoring (or ignorant of) the realities of real-world development

I don't think so. In real world development, sure a schedule may be tight and it may be necessary to write code that is not 'as good as it could be' just to get it out the door, or to fix an urgent bug. But that still isn't good code, it is just working code. If it is left as-is, and the code base is modified over time, then such code can cause more and more issues (as you must know) If you're a good, experienced, programmer, then the likelihood of quickly developed code being poor is less, but we all know we sometimes cut corners to get the job done - and we all know it comes back to bite us (or our successor) in the bum when that happens. If someone writes hundreds of lines of spaghetti code to achieve what could have been written in a few lines of well structured code, by your measure, it is good code if the output is as required. But a part of the output should be the codes longevity and maintainability, not just the function return value.

MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')

[Lost User]

this is good code according to JSOP (to save you compiling and building it, it is a flight simulator) and it works.

#include
#include
#include
#include
double L ,o ,P
,_=dt,T,Z,D=1,d,
s[999],E,h= 8,I,
J,K,w[999],M,m,O
,n[999],j=33e-3,i=
1E3,r,t, u,v ,W,S=
74.5,l=221,X=7.26,
a,B,A=32.2,c, F,H;
int N,q, C, y,p,U;
Window z; char f[52]
; GC k; main(){ Display*e=
XOpenDisplay( 0); z=RootWindow(e,0); for (XSetForeground(e,k=XCreateGC (e,z,0,0),BlackPixel(e,0))
; scanf("%lf%lf%lf",y +n,w+y, y+s)+1; y ++); XSelectInput(e,z= XCreateSimpleWindow(e,z,0,0,400,400,
0,0,WhitePixel(e,0) ),KeyPressMask); for(XMapWindow(e,z); ; T=sin(O)){ struct timeval G={ 0,dt*1e6}
; K= cos(j); N=1e4; M+= H*_; Z=D*K; F+=_*P; r=E*K; W=cos( O); m=K*W; H=K*T; O+=D*_*F/ K+d/K*E*_; B=
sin(j); a=B*T*D-E*W; XClearWindow(e,z); t=T*E+ D*B*W; j+=d*_*D-_*F*E; P=W*E*B-T*D; for (o+=(I=D*W+E
*T*B,E*d/K *B+v+B/K*F*D)*_; p K)N=1e4; else{ q=W/K *4E2+2e2; C= 2E2+4e2/ K
*D; N-1E4&& XDrawLine(e ,z,k,N ,U,q,C); N=q; U=C; } ++p; } L+=_* (X*t +P*M+m*l); T=X*X+ l*l+M *M;
XDrawString(e,z,k ,20,380,f,17); D=v/l*15; i+=(B *l-M*r -X*Z)*_; for(; XPending(e); u *=CS!=N){
XEvent z; XNextEvent(e ,&z);
++*((N=XLookupKeysym
(&z.xkey,0))-IT?
N-LT? UP-N?& E:&
J:& u: &h); --*(
DN -N? N-DT ?N==
RT?&u: & W:&h:&J
); } m=15*F/l;
c+=(I=M/ l,l*H
+I*M+a*X)*_; H
=A*

[Vivi Chellappa]

Slacker007 wrote:

We obviously cannot make this determination about ourselves or our code. So who does?

Good Houskeeping magazine. They hand out the Seal of Approval for all sorts of things. So you could write to them. ;P

[wizardzz]

If you copy and paste good developers' code, then you have yourself good code.

"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson

[Lost User]

Not being a professional programmer myself; only a hobbyist, I would say that good code is code that gets the job done in the most efficient (from a performance point of view), understandable (from a readability point of view) manner and that this will be self evident to anyone viewing the code.

[Sander Rossel]

Reread your code next week, if you still understand what is going on it has potential to be good. Reread your code next month, if you still understand what is going on your code might be pretty allright. Reread your code after six months, if you still understand what is going on you probably have a winner. Reread your code after a year, if you still understand what is going on your code is good. Now have a colleague read your code. If he can't understand it he is in desperate need for some schooling (after all, your code is good). Now have your boss read your code. If he can't understand it your code wasn't good after all (even if your boss isn't a programmer, he makes the rules). Now have someone outside of your company read it. If he can't understand it who cares? His opinion doesn't matter anyway. Code that gets older than approximately five years (perhaps probably less) is bad code by definition. I think really very few people have written good code, ever :)

It's an OO world.

public class Naerling : Lazy<Person>{
public void DoWork(){ throw new NotImplementedException(); }
}

[Fran Porretto]

"Good" is an evaluation. An evaluation must rest on explicit criteria of goodness / badness. These are often personal.

My criteria for "Is it good code?" are:

1. Does it fulfill the requirements of the application?
2. Is it stable under the worst projected loads?
3. Is it legible and maintainable by a competent engineer other than the originator?

Code that incorporates assorted ingenuities can meet criteria 1 and 2 but fail criterion 3. And criterion 3 is just as important as the others.

Not long ago a subordinate of mine wrote exactly that sort of program. His product was massively ingenious. It was even visually impressive. But it was effectively unmaintainable -- "effectively," because this particular program is one that, by its very nature, requires rapid modification, and requires it frequently, at that. My first two attempts to alter it proved that conclusively. So at the earliest politic opportunity, despite the impact to my regular responsibilities, I "spent five hours to save five minutes," as the saying goes, and rewrote the thing from the requirements, making maximally sure that any moderately competent engineer could easily understand its workings.

I still have the predecessor program. I go back to it now and then, just to remind myself of what too much cleverness can cost, down the maintenance road.

(This message is programming you in ways you cannot detect. Be afraid.)

[Slacker007]

Naerling wrote:

I think really very few people have written good code, ever

The whole point of my question, really. :)

"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)

[Slacker007]

_Maxxx_ wrote:

this is good code according to JSOP

You and I both know what JSOP meant. ;) ...nice plane.

"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011) "But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)