On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Judah McAuley wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Matt Quackenbush wrote: > > That's the beauty of refactoring, though. Unless you need to, don't. > And > > if no other method is calling it (or expected to call it), then it is not > > needed. If it becomes needed, refactor and add it in. :-) > > I generally agree with this notion but I think it starts to fall apart > with more complex methods. You might have a whole routine that only > gets called one place but is complex enough that there are benefits to > breaking it up into multiple methods that have single concerns. Doing > so makes it easier to debug (the method names provide helpful clues to > follow the chain of execution) and makes it much easier to unit test. >
I totally agree. I was trying to approach it from the perspective of a n00b, though. (Hence the overly generalized statement.) I was figuring that the OP is not unit testing or writing up huge, complex methods. My apologies if I misunderstood the OP's current level of experience with these concepts. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:342809 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
