Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • 13
    +1 for disavowing the always part of the question and focusing on the meat: Whether or not long methods are bad. I think the OP is looking for justification as though his scenario is an edge case, though usually when I hear people explain away their bad practices as necessary for the uncommon scenario, it's just because they didn't try very hard to use good practices. The uncommon scenarios are truly very uncommon, long methods are sadly however quite common. Commented Oct 15, 2012 at 14:58
  • 2
    OK looking at the list above: readability I would say from past experience is increased by having the method longer, containing lots of comments, and well formatted, rather than having to jump about the code from method to methods Though this is probably quite subjective. I don't expect the parts of the code to be reused. Most of the reuse of the code is achieved from inheritance at the moment. Commented Oct 15, 2012 at 16:03
  • 1
    @wobbily_col BTW, if you're looking for a well-written text which goes through the rationale of having shorter methods, read the first few chapters of Clean Code, which does a pretty good job of the explanation. Commented Oct 15, 2012 at 17:18
  • 5
    @wobbily_col You say that having to jump around too much to understand the code with many methods is confusing, I think the missing point here is on the importance of naming. If a method is well named, you do not need to look at it to find out what it's doing, the calling method should be completely comprehensible without any underlying knowledge of what the methods it calls are doing, for instance have you ever used someVar.toString() and felt you needed to see the code of toString to know what it is doing? You just read right past it because of good method naming. Commented Oct 15, 2012 at 22:59
  • 4
    On a side note, having a method that needs n parameters is also a code smell and indicates that the method may do more than one thing. Same goes for having a method thats hard to name. And if it really needs all those parameters, they usually are a part of a bigger concept, that can and should be enclosed in a class of its own. Of course, we could come up with an example thats better off not using this rule - my point is that if you see such a method, investigate it throughly, it probably is bad in some way. Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 9:34