Comment by CRConrad

> But the first line in the article suggests that it is an attack against the entire idea of writing good quality code:

> 'It may not be possible for us to ever reach empirical definitions of "good code" or "clean code"

If you re-read that line you quoted you may find that it talks of the (im)possibility of defining what "good code" or "clean code" is, not of actually writing it.

A bit like pornography in that way.