> The alternative of rewriting or reengineering the same solution each time is simply awful and you'll screw up way more often
He might not have communicated it completely correctly, but I believe he wasn't advocating for getting rid of functions to reduce redundancy.
He instead was advocating getting rid of functions that simply provide documentation of the process, and instead find a way to inline those functions clearly.
> However the flip side is that when you do track it down, you will fix several bugs you didn't even know about.
I think he is saying a class of bugs is avoided. For instance if I do X, Y and Z where all are only ran when the player is alive and Y might kill the player, leaving the player alive avoids a bug in Z if it assumes that the player is alive.
He might not have communicated it completely correctly, but I believe he wasn't advocating for getting rid of functions to reduce redundancy.
He instead was advocating getting rid of functions that simply provide documentation of the process, and instead find a way to inline those functions clearly.
> However the flip side is that when you do track it down, you will fix several bugs you didn't even know about.
I think he is saying a class of bugs is avoided. For instance if I do X, Y and Z where all are only ran when the player is alive and Y might kill the player, leaving the player alive avoids a bug in Z if it assumes that the player is alive.