On 21/11/2012 11:02, Andriy Kornatskyy wrote:
Robert, You would never get a better product by accident. The meaning of better product might differ from team to team but you can not ignore excessive complexity. Earlier or later you get back to that code and refactor it, thus existence of such fact was driven by your intention to make it a bit better (easier to understand, to support, to cover with unit tests, etc), with a team of 20 heads you can get even further: the whole team adherence. So those drops make the overall picture better. This is what you, as a software developer, donate to what the final better product become.
I think you may be misinterpreting the English idiom. I don't mean that your finger slips and randomly types out better code. I mean that by focusing on CC as a metric for improvement, you may very well end up improving the code, but it's not because you reduced the CC of the code. It's because of all of those *other* things that you talk about. Those are the things that should drive your refactoring, not CC, because they actually do cause improved code.
-- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
