>You can't change human nature, you can only work around it
You can create systems that provide the guardrails and incentives to modify human behavior though.
The root of much of this discussion is communication, which is a near-ubiquitous problem in relatively large organizations. Communication, in this instance, is that people want to have a clue about what something does.
The authors point is that as code changes, the names may no longer communicate what that code does. Unfortunately, their suggestion to make cutesy names does nothing to fix the communication issue. We're still left with poor communication about what the thing does. It's a veiled attempted to pretend like they're solving the problem of communication, but it's just a disguise that leaves the same problem at the end of the day.
At least with descriptive names, I can have some clue as to what the code used to do, and maybe glean from that why it is the way it is now.
You can create systems that provide the guardrails and incentives to modify human behavior though.
The root of much of this discussion is communication, which is a near-ubiquitous problem in relatively large organizations. Communication, in this instance, is that people want to have a clue about what something does.
The authors point is that as code changes, the names may no longer communicate what that code does. Unfortunately, their suggestion to make cutesy names does nothing to fix the communication issue. We're still left with poor communication about what the thing does. It's a veiled attempted to pretend like they're solving the problem of communication, but it's just a disguise that leaves the same problem at the end of the day.
At least with descriptive names, I can have some clue as to what the code used to do, and maybe glean from that why it is the way it is now.