Comment by lamontcg

I like to think of the way Hemmingway writes.

Code should be simple and tight and small. It should also, however, strive for an eighth grade reading level.

You shouldn't try to make your classes so small that you're abusing something like nested ternary operators which are difficult to read. You shouldn't try to break up your concepts so much that while the sentences are easy, the meaning of the whole class becomes muddled. You should stick with concepts everyone knows and not try to invent your own domain specific language in every class.

Less code is always more, right up until it becomes difficult to read, then you've gone too far. On the other hand if you extract a helper method from a method which read fine to begin with, then you've made the code harder to read, not easier, because its now bigger with an extra concept. But if that was a horrible conditional with four clauses which you can express with a "NeedsFrobbing" method and a comment about it, then carry on (generating four methods from that conditional to "simplify" it is usually worse, though, due to the introduction of four concepts that could be often better addressed with just some judicious whitespace to separate them).

And I need to learn how to write in English more like Hemmingway, particularly before I've digested coffee. That last paragraph got away from me a bit.