[zzbzq]

Wrong, wrong. Opposite of everything he said. All his examples are backwards. The article is basically inversing the Single Responsibility Principle.

First of all, consistency does not matter at all, ever. THat's his main thesis so it's already wrong. Furthermore, all his examples are backwards. If you didn't know the existence of "bot" users, you probably don't want your new auth mechanism to support them. Otherwise, the "nasty surprise" is the inverse of what he said: not that you find you don't support bot users, but you find out that you do.

Build stuff that does exactly what you want it to do, nothing more. This means doing the opposite of what he said. Do not re-use legacy code with overloaded meanings.

[pavel_lishin]

> First of all, consistency does not matter at all, ever. THat's his main thesis so it's already wrong.

Can you say more about this? Because I strongly disagree with your assertion.

[veverkap]

> Build stuff that does exactly what you want it to do, nothing more

This is also confusing to me. In a multi-million line codebase, it's extremely difficult to find an actual place where you have zero side effects with ANYTHING you write.

[fixprix]

Wrong. If code is written consistently everywhere, that allows any dev to dive in anywhere to get work done. Which is what you often have to do in large code bases to make cross functional updates.

Code bases where devs pick a different framework or library for every little thing are a nightmare to maintain. Agreed on standards is what gets your team out of the weeds to work on a higher and more productive level.