back
1 comments
It's still a tradeoff: in a previous team switching languages it openned the door to function with 5+ parameters, when that was highly throwned upon otherwise.

It's a tool to help better manage complexity, and that naturally invites more complexity as well.

is that an issue of the language or of the team?

adding additional names does not add additional complexity. complexity arises in interactions between components.

I see it as mostly influenced by the language and tooling. From there, some people will be more attracted by one side or the other, but when moving stack you tend to follow the stack's natural incline.

For instance ruby helps to have shorter, less verbose code, but with more hidden components. Rails rose from there, tooling tends to support that style. I've seen java devs moving to ruby and naturally writing less verbose code.

In contract Java tooling makes it a lot more manageable to write 40 character long classes, deeper dependency trees and injections and potentially auto-generate half of the needed methods. The cost is low, and there's less incentive to fight that trend when tools help you abstract part of it.

i agree but you discuss verbosity and not complexity
Fair point.

You're right that total complexity across the system fundamentally doesn't change (it's up to the devs and the problems at hand). Local complexity in each part of the system can vary, but the whole will probably always be least as complex as it needs to be.