awakedeveloper.xyz - Refactoring and Good Code

Refactoring and Good Code - AwakeDeveloper

Awakedeveloper.xyz Spined HTML

Refactoring and GoodLawmaking- AwakeDeveloper AwakeDeveloper Linus Torvalds: "Most good programmers do programming not considering they expect to get paid or get unctuousness by the public, but considering it is fun to program"   Skip to content HomeSix weightier blogs well-nigh programming and wiry Refactoring and GoodLawmaking  By admin November 26, 2016 December 11, 2016LawmakingQuality Our lawmaking is not unchangingly the weightier one which we can do, and we have to seem this fact. Sometimes our solutions, designs, algorithms are not good, because they have been implemented with pressure due to a deadline. So it would be a good option in a tropical future to make a refactor in our lawmaking as part of our development. The main reasons are the following:  Modernizelawmaking readability Reduce complexityModernizethe maintainability of the source lawmakingModernizeextensibility ¿What is maintainability? It is how difficult to fix a defect or add new resurgence over one functionality which it has been created.     ¿What is extensibility? It is a system diamond principle where the implementation takes future growth into consideration. It is a systemic measure of the worthiness to proffer a system and the level of effort required to implement the extension   Wikipedia – Extensibility definition   ¿How can I know if my lawmaking bad smells? If your source lawmaking have some of the pursuit symptoms or features, likely you lawmaking bad smells:Lawmakingwithin classes Long methods The platonic length of a method has variegated opinions. In the Clean Code: A Handbook ofWirySoftware Craftsmanship, Robert Martin claims: “The first rule of functions is that they should be small. The second rule of functions is that they should be smaller than that. Functions should not be 100 lines long. Functions should whimsically overly be 20 lines long“.Also Kent Beck claims that “Every function in his program was just two, or three, or four lines long. Each was transparently obvious. Each told a story. And each led you to the next in a compelling order. That’s how short your functions should be!“, so both have the same opinion. Comments On the one hand,  comments should not be necessary considering the lawmaking should read as natural language and easy to understand.On the other hand, this does not unchangingly happen and comments would be necessary in order to sieve some speciality of the code, however you should not use these ones in every line since it would distract of the most important the code. There is a good quote abouts comments of Robert Martin: “A long descriptive name is largest than a short enigmatic name. A long descriptive name is largest than a long descriptive comment.” Excessive number of arguments The number of numbers of a function or procedure should be as few as possible. If your function have a lot of parameters, maybe you are doing something wrong and you have to pinpoint your method in flipside way or perhaps you have to split it in increasingly methods.Regarding the number of arguments Robert Martin has personal in the wipe lawmaking book: “The platonic number of arguments for a function is zero (niladic). Next comes one (monadic), followed closely by two (dyadic). Three arguments (triadic) should be avoided where possible.Increasinglythan three (polyadic) requires very special justification — and then shouldn’t be used anyway.“ Dead lawmaking It ways unnecessary, inoperative lawmaking that can be removed. Indistinguishablelawmaking It is when the same lawmaking is used increasingly than once. This problem is very important in the software minutiae and we have to try to stave it in order to increase the quality of the source code. DRY (Don’t repeat yourself) principle can be a good solution in order to stave the indistinguishable code, if you want to know increasingly information well-nigh this principle you can take a squint this conversation among the Pragmatic Programmers Andy Hunt, Dave Thomas and Bill Venners well-nigh maintenance programming.Also you can trammels the pursuit vendible DRY PrincipleProvisionaryhuge complexityProvisionarystatements tend to be very complex, so that we have to try to simplify them. To simplify them, you can decompose the ramified condition in some methods with proper names or you can use logic rules to reduce the complexity of the condition. Wrong names When a developer is writing source code, he has to segregate the proper names for methods, variables and constants.  Usually, we want to save some time and we do not spend unbearable time to segregate the proper names, considering the names have to meet the pursuit criteria: Names have to reveal your intentionsStavedisinformation Good names length Use one word per conceptUnchanginglylawmaking in one notation Regarding the names of methods,  variables, classes and other elements Robert Martin in the CleanLawmakingBook says the following:“The proper use of comments is to recoup for our failure to express our self in code“Also he claims other statements well-nigh the names:“Functions should do something, or wordplay something, but not both.““Methods should have verb or phrase names.”“One way to know that a function is doing increasingly than ‘one thing’ is if you can pericope flipside function from it with a name that is not merely a restatement of its implementation.“Goods examples of name for methods would be the followings: “handleXYZ”, “getXYZ”, “calculateXYZ” Large matriculation A matriculation should be small, as small as it would be possible. Regarding the Refactoring in Large Software Projects,  Martin Lippert and Stephen Roock talk well-nigh the Rule of 30:If an element consists of increasingly than 30 sub-elements, it is highly probable that there is a serious problem:a) Methods should not have increasingly than an stereotype of 30 lawmaking lines (not counting line spaces and comments).b) A matriculation should contain an stereotype of less than 30 methods, resulting in up to 900 lines of code.c) A package shouldn’t contain increasingly than 30 classes, thus comprising up to 27,000 lawmaking lines.d) Subsystems with increasingly than 30 packages should be avoided. Such a subsystem would count up to 900 classes with up to 810,000 lines of code.e) A system with 30 subsystems would thus possess 27,000 classes and 24.3 million lawmaking lines.Maybe the Rule of 30 is a good guide in order to create wipe classes. Speculative generality You should write lawmaking for the problem which you have found and you do not worry well-nigh tomorrow’s problems when these ones definitely happen. And you should not lose between “what if…”  and “in a future if …”.Within the Extremeprogramming practices, it exists a principle or good practice whose name is YagNi (YouArentGonnaNeedIt) and it talks well-nigh fixing the current problem and you do not think in unlikely flows. Between Classes Message villenage It happens when there are a lot of method calls in order to get some data or information of a object. These villenage of methods undeniability do the lawmaking depends on the relationship between unrelated object. Middle man Sometimes a full-length of model can be used in bad way. For instance, in Object Model you can consul the behaviour of a matriculation in variegated classes, however it might be possible that one of these delegated classes do not have any responsibility, so it was wrong considering it can not exist a matriculation without responsibility. Be enlightened with the classes which are simply wrappers. Shotgun surgery It happens when you have to transpiration a lot of pieces of your source lawmaking in variegated places to add a new functionality in your application. LazyMatriculationEvery classes have a forfeit of money and time to understand and maintain them, so that if there are classes that they can not pay for your attention. Theses classes should be removed,  considering they increase the complexity and maintainability of the project. Alternative classes with variegated interfaces It happens when it exists two variegated classes with variegated interfaces, but they have similar behaviour so you would make a refactor  using an connector pattern to unify both interfaces. Primitive obsession The main rationalization for this problem is: “Use primitive data types to represent domain ideas”. It used to happen in a weakness moment, when the programmer decides to take the simple option instead of thinking flipside kind of solution increasingly difficult than the previous one (For example: create a new matriculation to represent the new field).Primitives are often used to “simulate” types. So instead of a separate data type, you have a set of numbers or strings that form the list of mandated values for some entity. Easy-to-understand names are then given to these specific numbers and strings via constants, which is why they are spread wide and far. Data matriculation When it exists classes with only nature and getters and setters methods, these classes are merely stored data for other classes, and these ones do not contain any spare functionality to work for they own. It’s a normal thing when a newly created matriculation contains only a few public fields (and maybe plane a handful of getters/setters). But the true power of objects is that they can contain behaviour types or operations on their data. Data clumps Sometime in variegated parts of the lawmaking there is the same group of variables tropical to the same object, so it is likely that this group of variables vest to the matriculation of that object. Therefore you should to pericope that variables to that class.The main reason of this problem is “the copy-pasta programming” and an poor data structure. RefusedThrowbackIt smells when you have a matriculation which inherits of flipside matriculation but you do not use all the functionality provided by the bequest. So the hierarchy is off-kilter and the unneeded methods might go unused. Indecent Exposure Encapsulate is one of the most important features of the Software Design, in wing this one is not used properly and as a programmer when we diamond and develop a class, we publicity nature or functionalities that they do not be shown. This fact contributes to increase the complexity of the design.Full-lengthEnvy This error helps to increase the coupling and duplicity lawmaking of the using which we are developing. It happens if a matriculation makes huge calls to other matriculation or classes so as to obtain data or functionality. In that case, it may move the functionality on data to this matriculation as well. Divergent changes It occurs when somebody has made changes to matriculation and the developer has included new behaviours that are very variegated that the previous ones. Therefore it contains too much unrelated functionality, so the developer should isolate that changes in other class. Parallel Inheritance Hierarchies While you are developing, you making a subclass of one class. Instead of making a subclass of another. So when you have defining the inheritance of a application, this structure has to be thought pretty well to stave errors like that. Solution sprawl Sometimes, we have implemented a solution in order to solve a problem or perform a responsibility, which it has wilt sprawled wideness several classes. This fact is the result of implementing a quick solution or full-length without spending unbearable time simplifying and consolidating the design.     ¿What can I do in order to modernize our legacy code? Refactoring would be a good answer, in fact there are some techniques which it can be used to get largest our source code. The most important are the following: Composing methods Moving features between objects Organizing data Simplifying provisionary expressions Simplifying method calls Also there is some practices such us S.O.L.I.D principles, DRY principle, Boy Scout rule and others, which you can use in order to modernize your quality lawmaking and may stave doing a refactor.   Finally, in pursuit wares we will delve into the variegated symptoms of the smell lawmaking to study why this happens, how we can fix it and how we try to stave it.   References: http://blog.codinghorror.com/code-smells/ https://sourcemaking.com/refactoring http://www.aivosto.com/vbtips/deadcode.html http://blog.goyello.com/2013/05/17/express-names-in-code-bad-vs-clean/ http://alvinalexander.com/programming/clean-code-quotes-robert-c-martin http://blog.codinghorror.com/code-smells/ http://www.industriallogic.com/wp-content/uploads/2005/09/smellstorefactorings.pdfIncreasinglyfrom my siteSoftware engineer and knowledgeDefensive Programming and Resilient SystemsWhy should you use theLawmakingReview?How to reservation an Exception with SpockJavascript weightier practices: Good tutorials Bookmark the permalink. « Why should you use theLawmakingReview? Software engineer and knowledge » Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email write will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Search for: Search Últimos TweetsNew vendible has been published: awakedeveloper.xyz/en/code-qua… I hope that it likes you Please provide your feedback! :D pic.twitter.com/puChPxDBLrOctober 15, 2017 2:05 pmGood tutorials for improving your javascript skills awakedeveloper.xyz/javascript/…December 23, 2016 4:30 pmMy new post well-nigh defensive programming and resilient system has been published: awakedeveloper.xyz/code-qualit… I expect your feedback!! :DDecember 15, 2016 5:45 pm Recent Posts How to reservation an Exception with Spock Javascript weightier practices: Good tutorials Defensive Programming and Resilient Systems Software engineer and knowledge Refactoring and GoodLawmakingCategoriesLawmakingQuality Javascript Unit Testing Martin Fowler: "Any fool can write lawmaking that a computer can understand. Good programmers write lawmaking that humans can understand." Powered by Parabola & WordPress.