Return to Answer

Whether one works clean or dirty is more a question of developer attitude and abilities, and the same holds for coding speed - this is rarely a deliberate decision people make.

Of course, there are devs who appear to work overly slow because they tend to be overly clean. But I have never seen a dev in my life who was really quick because their code was dirty. I have met devs who believed they were quick, but their dirty code haunted back at them the first time a tester or user tried to work with their mess. These devs may got the code quickly out of the door, just to get an even quicker phone call from a person who stumbled over the first few errors and made them clear their work wasn't finished.

Hence the idea of

a tool in my arsenal, to be able to code quick at the expense of dirty, to be able to choose when to use it

is IMHO flawed. The sweet spot for being quick is not "dirty", the sweet spot is found by

• being clean enough, but not being excessively clean

• invest enough time into proofreading and testing, not trying to save time by leaving these steps out

• knowing when to stop with unnecessary abstractions

• knowing which requirements have to be solved now, and stop worrying about "requirements which may or may not arise within the next ten years", which one actually cannot foresee.

Whether one works clean or dirty is more a question of developer attitude and abilities, and the same holds for coding speed - this is rarely a deliberate decision people make.

Of course, there are devs who appear to work overly slow because they tend to be overly clean. But I have never seen a dev in my life who was really quick because their code was dirty. I have met devs who believed they were quick, but their dirty code haunted back at them the first time a tester or user tried to work with their mess. These devs may got the code quickly out of the door, just to get an even quicker phone call from a person who stumbled over the first few errors and made them clear their work wasn't finished.

Hence the idea of

a tool in my arsenal, to be able to code quick at the expense of dirty, to be able to choose when to use it

is IMHO flawed. The sweet spot for being quick is not "dirty", the sweet spot is found by

• being clean enough, but not being excessively clean

• invest enough time into proofreading and testing, because saving time by leaving these steps out never works

• knowing when to stop with unnecessary abstractions

• knowing which requirements have to be solved now, and stop worrying about "requirements which may or may not arise within the next ten years", which one actually cannot foresee.

Whether one works clean or dirty is more a question of developer attitude and abilities, and the same holds for coding speed - this is rarely a deliberate decision people make.

Of course, there are devs who appear to work overly slow because they tend to be overly clean. But I have never seen a dev in my life who was really quick because their code was dirty. I have met devs who believed they were quick, but their dirty code haunted back at them the first time a tester or user tried to work with their mess. These devs may got the code quickly out of the door, just to get an even quicker phone call from a person who stumbled over the first few errors and made them clear their work wasn't finished.

Hence the idea of

a tool in my arsenal, to be able to code quick at the expense of dirty, to be able to choose when to use it

is IMHO flawed. The sweet spot for being quick is not "dirty", the sweet spot is found by

• being clean and attentive, but not being excessively clean

• knowing when to stop with unnecessary abstractions

• knowing which requirements have to be solved now, and stop worrying about "requirements which may or may not arise within the next ten years", which one actually cannot foresee.

Whether one works clean or dirty is more a question of developer attitude and abilities, and the same holds for coding speed - this is rarely a deliberate decision people make.

Of course, there are devs who appear to work overly slow because they tend to be overly clean. But I have never seen a dev in my life who was really quick because their code was dirty. I have met devs who believed they were quick, but their dirty code haunted back at them the first time a tester or user tried to work with their mess. These devs may got the code quickly out of the door, just to get an even quicker phone call from a person who stumbled over the first few errors and made them clear their work wasn't finished.

Hence the idea of

a tool in my arsenal, to be able to code quick at the expense of dirty, to be able to choose when to use it

is IMHO flawed. The sweet spot for being quick is not "dirty", the sweet spot is found by

• being clean enough, but not being excessively clean

• invest enough time into proofreading and testing, not trying to save time by leaving these steps out

• knowing when to stop with unnecessary abstractions

• knowing which requirements have to be solved now, and stop worrying about "requirements which may or may not arise within the next ten years", which one actually cannot foresee.

Whether one works clean or dirty is more a question of developer attitude and abilities, and the same holds for coding speed - this is rarely a deliberate decision people make.

Of course, there are devs who appear to work overly slow because they tend to be overly clean. But I have never seen a dev in my life who was really quick because their code was dirty. I have met devs who believed they were quick, but their dirty code haunted back at them the first time a tester or user tried to work with their mess. These devs may got the code quickly out of the door, just to get an even quicker phone call from an angry person who stumbled over the first few errors and made them clear their work wasn't finished.

Hence the idea of

a tool in my arsenal, to be able to code quick at the expense of dirty, to be able to choose when to use it

is IMHO flawed. The sweet spot for being quick is not "dirty", the sweet spot is found by

• being clean and attentive, but not being excessively clean

• knowing when to stop with unnecessary abstractions

• knowing which requirements have to be solved now, and stop worrying about "requirements which may or may not arise within the next ten years", which one actually cannot foresee.

Whether one works clean or dirty is more a question of developer attitude and abilities, and the same holds for coding speed - this is rarely a deliberate decision people make.

Of course, there are devs who appear to work overly slow because they tend to be overly clean. But I have never seen a dev in my life who was really quick because their code was dirty. I have met devs who believed they were quick, but their dirty code haunted back at them the first time a tester or user tried to work with their mess. These devs may got the code quickly out of the door, just to get an even quicker phone call from a person who stumbled over the first few errors and made them clear their work wasn't finished.

Hence the idea of

a tool in my arsenal, to be able to code quick at the expense of dirty, to be able to choose when to use it

is IMHO flawed. The sweet spot for being quick is not "dirty", the sweet spot is found by

• being clean and attentive, but not being excessively clean

• knowing when to stop with unnecessary abstractions

• knowing which requirements have to be solved now, and stop worrying about "requirements which may or may not arise within the next ten years", which one actually cannot foresee.