Am I the only one who thinks it's a great book and that it should still be among the top books to be recommended ? Maybe not the first one but easily in the top 10.
Each time I see the same discussion on HN about this book, I'm always wondering why I see so many people going in either direction : not following the advice of the book at all, or following it too religiously.
For me, the philosophy of the books was always about "having a set of guidance on how to improve your code, IF YOU NEED IT", and never about a strict set of rules that were mandatory to follow in order to have "clean code".
The fact that the book gives strong statements about what clean code is, such as "a function should be only one line" was always an exaggeration for me, albeit a useful one to actually makes the reader think more deeply about its function length, but never about forcing you to split your 1000 lines functions into 100 functions of 10 lines, if you don't need it.
Each time I see the same discussion on HN about this book, I'm always wondering why I see so many people going in either direction : not following the advice of the book at all, or following it too religiously.
For me, the philosophy of the books was always about "having a set of guidance on how to improve your code, IF YOU NEED IT", and never about a strict set of rules that were mandatory to follow in order to have "clean code".
The fact that the book gives strong statements about what clean code is, such as "a function should be only one line" was always an exaggeration for me, albeit a useful one to actually makes the reader think more deeply about its function length, but never about forcing you to split your 1000 lines functions into 100 functions of 10 lines, if you don't need it.