> just because two workflows shared some similarities. Usually I find this happening with hardcore OO programmers or bored programmers who feel the need to start creating and don't know when to stop. I prefer boring code at this stage in my career.
As a Haskeller, when I do this it's about getting certain guarantees about the semantics of related workflows and knowing they must behave the same in X, Y, and Z.
This aids in reasoning about inevitable production issues.
I find boring code easy to modify but hard to reason about from a higher level and that it typically requires nastier solutions to maintain backwards compatibility.
That last point is contradicted by this posts example though, so it has me reflecting on things.
As a Haskeller, when I do this it's about getting certain guarantees about the semantics of related workflows and knowing they must behave the same in X, Y, and Z.
This aids in reasoning about inevitable production issues.
I find boring code easy to modify but hard to reason about from a higher level and that it typically requires nastier solutions to maintain backwards compatibility.
That last point is contradicted by this posts example though, so it has me reflecting on things.