Torrent clean code

This course is a compilation of common patterns, best practices, principles and rules related to writing clean code. This is not a design patterns or general patterns course though — we will entirely focus on patterns, rules and concepts that help with writing clean code specifically. All these concepts and rules are backed up by examples, code snippets and demos. The major qualities of this software carry out the one clicks system servicing which provides faster pace and opens up to the hard drive.

It might be more than a solution of the isolation system. The information which has left through the device and washed away can be managed with the help of MyCleanPC Free download. MyCleanPC Activation code not only washes the Windows from the unneeded files, program debris but also enhances your system for the overall performance by clearing up the hard drive space.

CleanMyPc Activation Code is also very easily available and accessible these days and the program along with the keys to help in the stimulation. These are some of the steps for downloading My Clean PC. Now, the user can scan their device or MyCleanPC 1. There are some requirements that user needs to download and install the MyCleanPC activation code.

Here is a list of the system requirements-. Once the user has upgraded to the pro version of the MyCleanPC Activation code, then you will get the activation code either from the email confirmation or from the purchase confirmation page. Once, the mail is received about confirmation, then follow the given below steps-.

CleanMyPc Registry Key provides fast start up and also offers access to all of those materials for the quicker and easy reply with no errors. Majority of the software will be in the method after the elimination of the documents and files in your computer registry. The application system company has already created a reputation for themselves by means of the final product.

It consists of a number of clean up utilities for the Windows System. It provides the user with a very effective cleansing facility for the temporary and unwanted information being in the folders. Not only this, but MyCleanPC Registry Key also removes all the undesirable programmes, written recordings, leftovers and all the sensitive and confidential information saved by the internet browsing speed and also prevents the dangerous software system which attacks.

In conclusion, I just want to say that MyCleanPC License Key is an amazing software, which can really help your device to run smoothly and effectively and will definitely keep your device away from all the malware, cookies, unwanted files and all types of viruses. The best part about this software is that it is never late to download this MyCleanPC serial key because it can clean your device at any point though it is full of unwanted files and can protect your confidential and personal information safe and also there will be no risk of hacking anything.

So, MyCleanPC is something to be worth investing it for the overall maintenance of your device and your privacy. Sign in. Log into your account. Password recovery. Friday, January 14, Forgot your password?

I will confess at this stage that my Java skills are dated and rusty, almost as dated and rusty as this book, which is from But surely, even in , this code was illegible trash? First, the class name, SetupTeardownIncluder , is dreadful. It is , at least, a noun phrase, as all class names should be.

But it's a nouned verb phrase, the strangled kind of class name you invariably get when you're working in strictly object-oriented code, where everything has to be a class, but sometimes the thing you really need is just one simple gosh-danged function.

Inside the class, we have two public, static methods, one private constructor and fifteen private methods. Of the fifteen private methods, fully thirteen of them either have side effects they modify variables which were not passed into them as arguments, such as buildIncludeDirective , which has side effects on newPageContent or call out to other methods which have side effects such as include , which calls buildIncludeDirective.

Only isTestPage and findInheritedPage look to be side-effect-free. They still make use of variables which aren't passed into them pageData and testPage respectively but they appear to do so in side-effect-free ways. At this point you might conclude that maybe Martin's definition of "side effect" doesn't include member variables of the object whose method we just called.

If we take this definition, then the five member variables, pageData , isSuite , testPage , newPageContent and pageCrawler , are implicitly passed to every private method call, and they are considered fair game; any private method is free to do anything it likes to any of these variables. But Martin's own definition contradicts this. This is from earlier in this exact chapter, with emphasis added:.

Side effects are lies. Your function promises to do one thing, but it also does other hidden things. Sometimes it will make unexpected changes to the variables of its own class. Sometimes it will make them to the parameters passed into the function or to system globals. In either case they are devious and damaging mistruths that often result in strange temporal couplings and order dependencies. I like this definition.

I agree with this definition. It's a useful definition, because it enables us to reason about what a function does, with some degree of confidence, by referring only to its inputs and output. I agree that it's bad for a function to make unexpected changes to the variables of its own class. So why does Martin's own code, "clean" code, do nothing but this? Rather than have a method pass arguments to another method, Martin makes a distressing habit of having the first method set a member variable which the second method, or some other method, then reads back.

It's incredibly hard to figure out what any of this code does, because all of these incredibly tiny methods do almost nothing and work exclusively through side effects. As you watch carefully, they flick a switch on the wall. The switch looks like a light switch, but none of the lights in the kitchen turn on or off. Next, they open a cabinet and take down a mug, set it on the worktop, and then tap it twice with a teaspoon.

They wait for thirty seconds, and finally they reach behind the refrigerator, where you can't see, and pull out a different mug, this one full of fresh coffee.

What just happened? What was flicking the switch for? Was tapping the empty mug part of the procedure? Where did the coffee come from? That's what this code is like. Why does render have a side effect of setting the value of this. When is this. If it does get read back, why not just pass isSuite in as a Boolean? Or perhaps the caller reads it back? Why do we return pageData. How did the HTML get there?

Was it already there? We might make an educated guess that includeSetupAndTeardownPages has side effects on pageData , but then, what? We can't know either way until we look. And what other side effects does that have on other member variables? The uncertainty becomes so great that we suddenly have to wonder if calling isTestPage could have side effects too.

How would you unit-test this method? Well, you can't. It's not a unit. It can't be separated from the side-effects it has on other parts of the code. And what's up with the indentation? And where are the danged braces? Martin states, in this very chapter, that it makes sense to break a function down into smaller functions "if you can extract another function from it with a name that is not merely a restatement of its implementation".

But then he gives us:. There is at least one questionable aspect of this code which isn't Martin's fault: the fact that pageData 's content gets destroyed. Unlike the member variables isSuite , testPage , newPageContent and pageCrawler , pageData is not actually ours to modify.

It is originally passed in to the top-level public render methods by an external caller. However, during this work, as a side effect, pageData is destructively modified see updatePageContent. Surely it would be preferable to create a brand new PageData object with our desired modifications, and leave the original untouched? If the caller tries to use pageData for something else afterwards, they might be very surprised about what's happened to its content. But this is how the original code behaved prior to the refactoring, and the behaviour could be intentional.

Martin has preserved the behaviour, though he has buried it very effectively. Some other mild puzzles: why do we use pageData. And what exactly is the separation of concerns between PageCrawler and PageCrawlerImpl , both of which are in use here?

Pretty much, yeah. Clean Code mixes together a disarming combination of strong, timeless advice and advice which is highly questionable or dated or both.

Much of the book is no longer of much use. There are multiple chapters of what are basically filler, focusing on laborious worked examples of refactoring Java code; there is a whole chapter examining the internals of JUnit.

This book is from , so you can imagine how relevant that is now. There's a whole chapter on formatting, which these days reduces to a single sentence: "Pick a sensible standard formatting, configure automated tools to enforce it, and then never think about this topic again.

The content focuses almost exclusively on object-oriented code, and extols the virtues of SOLID , to the exclusion of other programming paradigms. Object-oriented programming was very fashionable at the time of publication. But the total absence of functional programming techniques or even simple procedural code was regrettable even then, and has only grown more obvious in the years since. SOLID is something of a non-sequitur in these domains.

The book focuses on Java code, to the exclusion of other programming languages, even other object-oriented programming languages. Java was popular at the time, and if you're writing a book like this, it makes sense to pick a single well-known language and stick with it, and Java is still very popular and may still be a strong choice for this purpose.

But the book's overall use of Java is very dated. This kind of thing is unavoidable — programming books date legendarily poorly. That's part of the reason why Clean Code was a recommended read at one time, and I now think that the pendulum is swinging back in the opposite direction. There's a chapter on unit testing.

There's a lot of good, basic, stuff in this chapter, about how unit tests should be fast, independent and repeatable, about how unit tests enable more confident refactoring of source code, about how unit tests should be about as voluminous as the code under test, but strictly simpler to read and comprehend. But then he shows us a unit test with what he says has too much detail:. This is done as part of an overall lesson in the virtue of inventing a new domain-specific testing language for your tests.

I was left so confused by this suggestion. I would use exactly the same code to demonstrate exactly the opposite lesson. Don't do this! Which is to say nothing of the method named wayTooCold. This is an adjective phrase. It's entirely unclear what this method does.

Does it set the world's state to be way too cold? Does it react to the world's state becoming way too cold? Or is it an assertion that the world's state currently must be way too cold? Methods should have verb or verb phrase names like postPayment , deletePage , or save. That's not me saying that. That's a direct quote from this book. Chapter 2, "Meaningful Names":. This is perfectly sound advice. And hw. What gives?

And even if you guess correctly that calling wayTooCold sets the temperature to be way too cold Earlier, we were advised to avoid code having side effects.

This, also, was sound advice. And it is, again, being ignored in the actual written code example. And since we're here, this, the original unrefactored code, is a fine demonstration of the drawbacks of unadorned Booleans.

What does it mean when, say, coolerState returns true? Does it mean that the cooler's current state is good, i. Or does it mean that it is powered on, and actively cooling? Second Law You may not write more of a unit test than is sufficient to fail, and not compiling is failing.

Third Law You may not write more production code than is sufficient to pass the currently failing test. These three laws lock you into a cycle that is perhaps thirty seconds long. The tests and the production code are written together, with the tests just a few seconds ahead of the production code.

But the book doesn't acknowledge the missing zeroth step in the process: figuring out how to break down the programming task in front of you, so that you can take a minuscule thirty-second bite out of it. That , in many cases, is exceedingly time-consuming, and frequently obviously useless, and frequently impossible. There's a whole chapter on "Objects and Data Structures". In it, we're provided with this example of a data structure:. These two examples show the difference between objects and data structures.

Objects hide their data behind abstractions and expose functions that operate on that data. Data structure expose their data and have no meaningful functions. Go back and read that again.

Notice the complimentary nature of the two definitions. They are virtual opposites. This difference may seem trivial, but it has far-reaching implications. Yes, you're understanding this correctly. Martin's definition of "data structure" disagrees with the definition everybody else uses.

This is a very strange choice of definition, though Martin does at least define his term clearly. Drawing a clear distinction between objects as dumb data and objects as sophisticated abstractions with methods is legitimate, and useful.

But it's quite glaring that there is no content in the book at all about clean coding using what most of us consider to be real data structures : arrays, linked lists, hash maps, binary trees, graphs, stacks, queues and so on. This chapter is much shorter than I expected, and contains very little information of value. I'm not going to rehash all the rest of my notes. I took a lot of them, and calling out everything I perceive to be wrong with this book would be counterproductive.

I'll stop with one more egregious piece of example code. This is from chapter 8, a prime number generator:. What the heck is this code? What is this algorithm? What are these method names? Earlier, we were advised that a method should be a command, which does something, or a query, which answers something, but not both.

This was good advice, so why do nearly all of these methods ignore it? And what of thread safety? Is this meant to be clean code? Is this meant to be a legible, intelligent way to search for prime numbers?

Are we supposed to write code like this? And if not, why is this example in the book? And where is the "real" answer? If this is the quality of code which this programmer produces — at his own leisure, under ideal circumstances, with none of the pressures of real production software development, as a teaching example — then why should you pay any attention at all to the rest of his book? Or to his other books? I wrote this essay because I keep seeing people recommend Clean Code.

I felt the need to offer an anti-recommendation. I originally read Clean Code as part of a reading group which had been organised at work. We read about a chapter a week for thirteen weeks. The book has seventeen chapters, we skipped some for reasons already mentioned.

Now, you don't want a reading group to get to the end of each session with nothing but unanimous agreement. You want the book to draw out some kind of reaction from the readers, something additional to say in response.

And I guess, to a certain extent, that means that the book has to either say something you disagree with, or not say everything you think it should say. On that basis, Clean Code was okay. We had good discussions. We were able to use the individual chapters as launching points for deeper discussions of actual modern practices. We talked about a great deal which was not covered in the book.

We disagreed with a lot in the book. Would I recommend this book? Would I recommend it as a beginner's text, with all the caveats above? Would I recommend it as a historical artifact, an educational snapshot of what programming best practices used to look like, way back in ? No, I would not. So the killer question is, what book s would I recommend instead? I don't know. Suggestions in the comments, unless I've closed them. After suggestions from comments below, I read A Philosophy of Software Design by John Ousterhout and found it to be a much more positive experience.

I would be happy to recommend it over Clean Code. As the title suggests, it focuses more on the practice of software design at a higher level than it does on the writing or critiquing of actual individual lines of code. As such, it contains relatively few code examples. Because it's aimed at this higher level, I think it's possibly not a suitable read for absolute beginner programmers. A lot of this high-level theory is difficult to comprehend or put into practice until you have some real experience to compare it with.

Having said that, I found A Philosophy of Software Design to be informative, cogent, concise and much more up-to-date. I found that I agreed with nearly all of Ousterhout's assertions and suggestions for good software design, many of which are diametrically opposed to those found in Clean Code.

By virtue of providing relatively high-level advice, I feel that the book is likely to age rather better too. Of course, software development is still moving forwards as I write this. Who knows what a good programming book will look like in ten more years?

Plain text only. The square root of minus one:. Things Of Interest Blog. It's the first and most important rule: The first rule of functions is that they should be small. SuiteResponder; import fitnesse. Let's ignore the wildcard import. This is from earlier in this exact chapter, with emphasis added: Side effects are lies. Let's just look at one private method. But even for the time, even for era Java, much of the provided code is bad. Chapter 2, "Meaningful Names": Methods should have verb or verb phrase names like postPayment , deletePage , or save.

This is from chapter 8, a prime number generator: package literatePrimes; import java. Update, After suggestions from comments below, I read A Philosophy of Software Design by John Ousterhout and found it to be a much more positive experience.

Back to Blog. Discussion by qntm: Side note, Clean Architecture is absolute garbage, I didn't get through it. However, I think there's general agreement on that topic. I think the closest thing to it I've seen that is still somewhat alive would probably be Picat.

Feathers was and is a practical book. It provides techniques for working with existing code, which is likely to happen more often than working things from scratch. All code is legacy. It's like how the speed of light is finite, which means technically you're always looking at the world as it was at some time in the past. You commit some new code, you go for a coffee break, you come back - it's legacy code now.

Michael Feathers has his own definition of legacy code. Quote from the book's back cover: "Is your code easy to change? Can you get nearly instantaneous feedback when you do change it? Do you understand it? If the answer to any of these questions is no, you have legacy code, [ I've seen a lot of backlash against Clean Code recently. It was transformative for me as a software greenhorn, introducing me to concepts like testability and readability, which they didn't tell us about in college.

It gave me a vocabulary to discuss program design. And it was short and easily digestible, minus some tedious examples. So until someone comes up with a wartless alternative, I'll continue recommending it to newbies, with the caveat that they should keep a grain of salt to hand and skip the boring parts.

As long as you have more experienced devs around to show you actually good programming, it can't do much harm. A philosophy of software design by John Ousterhaut. This is a short and accessible book that penetrates to the heart of deep truths about software development.

Someone made the point about legacy code but that term is rather dubious and used often just as derogatory term as opposed to something written in new trendier tools. Working useful code is quite often reused or called upon from other pieces of code, just look at any operating system and oldest piece of code it has: is it working?

Calling code "legacy" is missing the point: if it is garbage it is one thing, if it is written for a platform you no longer have that is quite another. I think it's very good.

I think they follow her rules in their workflow. Also, you can see it in their teaching platform - upcase. I believe those resources help me write my web apps in a way that I'm not embarrassed for. I wouldn't recommend them at all. Thanks for creating a counter argument to all the people that create dogma out of this book. What is your definition of a data structure? I started with Pascal in and my definition matches Martin's. I do agree with your conclusion about Martin's work however. I recommend The Practice of Programming by Kernighan and Pike, despite many of their publicly stated opinions on the subject.

I would add that the "hardware state" DSL would actually be good if it were also used in places other than tests, for example as a short state representation for debugging in logs, or for setting state in an emulator or test rig.

The book as you pointed out has issues. But not sure that there is an option to stop recommending it. It explains everything, not dogmatic, has academic foundations, but most of developers want short and simple ready to use solutions they are not going to read it. Its scope is intentionally limited to issues directly related to design, but on those it really shines. It also has a high density of insights per page, which I've found not to be the case in several other similar books.

I can't find the source, but there's a quote going around about some other book along the lines of "Where it is true, it's trivial; where it is nontrivial, it's wrong. I reread your breakdown of the FitNesse code example a few times and I felt less and less generous about the analysis each time. Here's two and half questions: 1 If private fields are NOT to be considered implicit arguments to every private method, what exactly are they for?

And if they should not be modified, why would they be anything other than 'final'? You could answer those uncharitably and make Uncle Bob look bad, or you could answer them charitably and then his code makes sense.