zlacker

>>jinhku+(OP)
First you must accept that engineering elegance != market value. Only certain applications and business models need the crème de le crème of engineers.

LLM has been hollowing out the mid and lower end of engineering. But has not eroded highest end. Otherwise all the LLM companies wouldn’t pay for talent, they’d just use their own LLM.

>>monero+M9
I keep hearing this but I don’t understand. If inelegant code means more bugs that are harder to fix later, that translates into negative business value. You won’t see it right away which is probably where this sentiment is coming from, but it will absolutely catch up to you.

Elegant code isn’t just for looks. It’s code that can still adapt weeks, months, years after it has shipped and created “business value”.

>>WD-42+7f
Sometimes "elegance" just makes shit hard to read.

Write boring code[0], don't go for elegance or cool language features. Be as boring and simple as possible, repeat yourself if it makes the flow clearer than extracting an operation to a common library or function.

This is the code that "adapts" and can be fixed 3 years after the elegant coder has left for another greenfield unicorn where they can use the latest paradigms.

[0] https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/on-long-term-software-deve...