This morning, I was going through my RSS reader. In one of the programming feeds that I read, I read two different articles both of which were talking about Git.
Each were talking about something that has been discussed I don’t know how many times over in the past by someone else:
Should dependencies be kept in Git or now?
And an outline of Git branching strategies.
It’s easy to look at posts like this – just like I can look at stuff I’ve written and realize it’s been discussed by someone else or you can look at stuff that you’ve written and find something similar has been written by someone else – and want to dismiss them.
That’s not the best way to think about publishing practical technical content, though. Even though someone else has likely already written your blog post, that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth writing.
You have a different audience than whoever you’ve come across. And although you may be reading something similar to what you’ve read or written, that doesn’t mean that whoever reads your site is reading those sites.
Writing for others is important, but it may be just as important if not more important than writing for yourself. Distilling your ideas into something that you can explain is incredibly helpful in making sure you solidify the information you’ve learned.
Writing something this year can be different than writing something a few years ago (and will be different in writing it in the future). The economy and environment changes fast.
The context in which you’re sharing knowledge and explaining your ideas may be similar, but not exactly the same, as someone else.
The next time you attempt to write about something and are skeptical if you should hit publish or not, go ahead and hit publish. At best, you’re helping yourself and maybe someone else will come across what you’ve shared; at worst, you’re sharing something someone else has shared but it’s unique to what they do.
And since similar isn’t the same as unique, the value of publishing what you have to say is greater than not.
In software development, the concept of a side effect is generally understood to be something like this:
In computer science, an operation, function or expression is said to have a side effect if it modifies some state variable value(s) outside its local environment, which is to say if it has any observable effect other than its primary effect of returning a value to the invoker of the operation.
It’s really very simple. Side effect = changing something somewhere.
There are a handful of ways developers try to mitigate side effects such as automated testing or quality assurance, but when a piece of software is large enough such that each part that composes the system is like a small system unto itself, it’s not difficult to imagine how introducing new code could inadvertently change the state of the program.
This is why any given project at scale is impressive to see work as smoothly as it does. (Sure, projects like large scale web applications, operating systems, are one thing but thinking about medical software, automotive software, the software that runs on airplanes, applications built at places such as NASA, and so on are all the more amazing.)
Bringing this down to the level of stuff I write about and that I work on during my day-to-day – specifically WordPress – side effects are something we’re likely all too familiar with experiencing.
If nothing else, think about the last time you activated a plugin and it immediately conflicted with another plugin or a feature of theme.
It could have thrown up a notice,
It might have displayed an error message,
Perhaps it completely broke the way some part of the way the core application functions,
Or it just threw up a PHP error message that wasn’t even clear on what was going on.
To make matters even more fun, the only way to resolve the issue is the disable the plugin via WP CLI or, even more drastic, deleting the plugin.
This is an obvious example of a side effect in WordPress. They can happen for any number reasons, too. Sometimes it’s a matter of running a different version of PHP, it could be a matter of a team not keeping their code contained in its own namespace, or perhaps it’s a matter of not doing enough testing.
Regardless of the case, it’s something many of us have experienced and it’s likely a problem many of us have caused during our careers.
Initially, when I started thinking about side effects in WordPress development, I was working on a plugin that needed to fire when certain events happen during the user management lifecycle.
From there, I started thinking about edge cases and then I started thinking about the overall economy around WordPress and the interoperability and compatibility challenges that come with writing software that runs on top of a piece of open source software that powers so much of the web.
It’s impressive.
Then I was left at a fork of what I wanted to discuss:
Should I talk about the initial problem that kicked off this entire post (that is, making sure I handled all cases of user management)?
Or should I offer general commentary on edge cases and how it relates to work in building WordPress or WordPress adjacent projects?
If you’ve read this far, it’s obvious that I’ve spent more time on the latter than the former. So I’ll save the former for another day.
Since I’ve discussed this at length already, these are a few things – in no specific order – I recommend doing the following things to prevent side effects and conflicts when working on WordPress-specific code:
Know the environment(s) in which you’re code is going to run and write for the lowest supported version.
When writing a custom function that will fire on a specific hook, take the time to understand the priority and number of arguments the function will expect and write your code defensively (that is, ask “how would I write this code so someone else’s won’t interfere with what I’m trying to do?”)
Don’t be afraid of writing unit tests not only to ensure your code is doing what it’s supposed to do but also that it’s not doing anything it shouldn’t be doing.
Before writing anything to any type of storage, make sure that the keys you’re using are not already in use and/or make sure to uniquely prefix the keys you’re going to use.
Don’t add frontend assets to any page that doesn’t need them.
I don’t know if it’s possible to put together and exhaustive list. But in my experience, these are the things that I’ve found to be helpful especially as it relates to working on backend development.
When sending asynchronous requests to a WordPress back-end, which may be a REST API or an Ajax callback, it’s helpful to know what headers to specify when sending said data.
Since I recently shared another post about idempotency in REST API design and since asynchronous calls are more common than they have been in the past, I thought it useful to share when to use what type of headers when making said requests.
If you’re working with WordPress in some capacity – be it a headless state or working on processing Ajax calls – then it’s useful indicate how your data is being sent and in what format the data is being sent. Ultimately, your asynchronous methods and headers need to do more than just work.
That is, it’s not enough for it to simply be sent and received. Instead, the data should be sent in a format congruent with what the backend service expects. If anything, future you will thank you. To make it even more relevant, this is an opportunity to keep our code as clean as possible.
Asynchronous Methods and Headers
When creating an Ajax request in WordPress using modern, vanilla JavaScript the request will likely look something like this:
Notice here I’m specifying the headers as part of the request which isn’t something we’ve historically done. In this example, I’m using application/json.
It’s also common to send form data across the wire, too. And if you do that, then your request will look something like this:
Obviously, know which type of header to send and when is important. As obvious as it seems, these are the guidelines I recommend when working in the context of WordPress-centric applications.
Use application/json whenever you’re sending a payload that’s structured as JSON. Whenever you’re receiving the data on the server, you’ll need to use json_decode or your language’s equivalent to parse the data.
Use application/x-www-form-urlencoded whenever you’re sending a payload that comes from data being sent from a form element or in a string of key/value pairs such as key_one=value_one&key_two=value_two. Typically, this will be received in a POST request.
Again, however you specify the method and the header, the data will still be sent but how you manage it on the server may not match up to what’s expected.
If someone else – either someone with whom you work or just future you – reads the client-side code and the server-side code and what’s sent doesn’t match, it’s going to create an entire set of circumstances of detangling what’s been done and something that’s completely unavoidable.
If you’re around my age or have been in the industry since the early 2000s, you likely think of the phrase “clean code” being synonymous with the book by the same name written by Uncle Bob (or Robert Martin).
From the description of the book:
[Robert Martin] has teamed up with his colleagues from Object Mentor to distill their best agile practice of cleaning code “on the fly” into a book that will instill within you the values of software craftsman, and make you a better programmer―but only if you work at it.
There’s a long history behind what Uncle Bob was trying to do with the software craftsmanship movement (and I don’t think his ideas were bad, for whatever it’s worth). And this book, along with a few others, helped to foster large swaths of developers to begin implementing certain practices in their day-to-day work.
This book, the author, and what it espouses is not without criticism and it seemed to get stronger the longer the book has been out. But regardless of how many practices are taught in a book – or lecture or podcast or presentation – there is always at least something to take away from it.
And though there are plenty of things in Clean Code that are tough to put into practice or aren’t always feasible to do so, that doesn’t mean some of it can’t be done.
This doesn’t refute or support the statement in the original article though, does it? Specifically, said article claims: “Nobody gives a f*** about your clean code.”
Is that true?
Who Cares About Clean Code?
A Little Bit of History (or “Back in the day…”)
When I started my first job out of college, we were used a tool called BitKeeper for version control. It’s since been discontinued. Here’s the thing about BitKeeper though: It was only for committing code. There were no other associated tools like we’ve come to expect with GitHub (such as PRs, issues, project management, wikis, etc.).
This meant that all code reviews – even if we were pair programming on a project – requested code reviews via email. So before we committed any code that would go out to staging, it needed to be reviewed by a team (of approximately seven people – they were small teams :) and it had to be done via email.
The idea of doing code reviews via email seems silly now, but that’s how it was done. Regardless, the point is we were still doing code reviews.
And this is where the concept of clean code is relevant.
At some level, it was always expected that we would be writing readable code. This isn’t necessarily the same as clean code because readable code can include a function that’s dozens of lines long and does more than one thing, but it gets the work done (whatever the work may be).
If the project allowed for it, then cleaner code and strong architecture was usually expected and if basic principles weren’t put in place then it would be brought up during a code review.
And this is where it’s important to ask: Does anyone care about clean code? Often times, it’s deadlines that matter (or the amount of time it takes to deliver a working solution).
A Hierarchy of What Matters in Software
Since having a working solution is what provides value to a user then whether or not it’s built following a particular paradigm or employing a set of principles that make for cleaner more maintainable code will always take a backseat.
If there’s a hierarchy of what’s often expected out of code, it’s something like this:
It solves the problem (it works),
It’s bug free (in so far as it’s measurable),
It can be easily patched if a bug is caught,
It’s commented so fellow developers know what’s happening if they have to jump into the fray to work on it,
It follows whatever coding standard the organization implements,
It follows the principles of Clean Code.
There are probably a lot more but the point I’m making is that the author is right: Clean code doesn’t matter as much as delivering a working solution.
If writing clean code delays shipping a solution then the natural consequence is you’re punting value for the customer over something they aren’t even aware exists.
The user doesn’t know how the codebase looks. The user just sees what features that product is offering. So don’t get overly attached to your clean and elegant code. Focus on shipping the feature on time and bug-free.
With all of that said, this is not an excuse not to attempt to write clean code, refactor when possible, or provide well-architected solutions.
Then How Can We Integrate Clean Code?
Whenever code is submitted for a code review, it’s likely that you’ll get feedback that is something like:
Maybe change [this particular line] to be a bit more readable such as removing the nested ternary operator,
Add a clause [to this function] so you’re checking to make sure something is readable or writeable before working with it,
Consider adding a guard clause at the top of the function,
If time allows, maybe create a base class and then subclass it so we don’t have some much duplicate functionality,
…and so on.
There are a lot of common suggestions here – so common that these are the ones that are at the top of my mind from code reviews I’ve received (and given). But did you catch the point about creating a base class? This is one of those pieces of feedback that appeals to DRY and though it’s something that would make the architecture more maintainable, it will also delay development more than the rest.
At this point, it’s likely going to be hard to implement that unless there’s enough time in the project. The other pieces of feedback will take priority.
When it comes to employing clean code in my day-to-day, I’ve found it most effective to start adding little things in as I have the chance. It’s a lot like compound interest – over time, the value adds up.
And then when you’re used to employing the small things all along, employing more strategic decisions gets easier because you’re already training your mind to think in terms of these strategies. After a long enough time of moving in this direction, you should be able to integrate writing clean code into your workflow all the while meeting the necessary deadlines.
This doesn’t mean you’re going to be employing every principle. That’s tough. But if you can start small and make those contributions over time all the while gradually training your thinking to fall in line with the principles of clean code, then it becomes the primary way in which you’ll write code.
No, you won’t always be able to do it. No, people generally won’t care about it: they’ll know what you’ve done when they see it but don’t expect praise for it. And though you may get some feedback on how to improve the code, there likely won’t be time to do so and you’ll have to earmark the suggestion and employ it in another project.
For many, it’s more popular to talk about clean code than it is to employ it. It’s more fun to talk about code than it is to write it. And it’s more fun to ship code than it is to refactor it.
So, yeah, most people aren’t going to care about your clean code. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t aspire to write it. I’m 16 years into my career and still working on employing new strategies with just about every project I write. I enjoy it even if code reviews don’t care about it.
And that’s because I know, ultimately, it’s going to make me a better engineer and it’s going to make the software more maintainable over time. Sure, it takes time to get there, but such is the case with just about anything worth doing.
TL;DR: I’ve found this to be true in my career. In my experience, whether or not you get a greenfield project depends on your company or the nature of your team.
If courses teach you’ll be building more greenfield projects than not, I’d be hesitant to consider it a well-rounded education in software development.
For the purposes of this article, I’m using the definition of greenfield project from Wikipedia:
In many disciplines, a greenfield project is one that lacks constraints imposed by prior work. The analogy is to that of construction on greenfield land where there is no need to work within the constraints of existing buildings or infrastructure.
By definition alone, it seems near impossible to think about starting a true greenfield project. I mean, if you’re building something from scratch you have the ability to pick every set of technology and standards the team will used to build the project.
But most projects start with some type of foundation these days. With some extreme exceptions, most things are going to start at the operating system level or will use a platform like the web and likely some type of framework that sits on top of it.
And to that end, there are already certain things in place that constrain what we can use.
The Greenfield Litmus Test
If anything, I’d say a greenfield projects depends on what you consider truly starting a project from scratch.
Absolute purists might claim that a true greenfield project is nothing but bare metal. No operating systems, no available programming languages, etc. Everything starts here and moves up.
Others may draw the line at an existing operating system, existing platform, existing framework, or something like that.
When it comes to greenfield projects, I’m of the mindset that once you know what platform on which you’re building, then you determine if a project is greenfield or not.
Perhaps this is a litmus test:
If you’re building software that’s going to operate on or within the context of a pre-existing product, then it’s not a greenfield project.
If you’re building something completely new to bring to market, then it’s a greenfield project.
It’s easy to start splitting hairs so I’m not going to keep going but this is the filter through which it may be helpful to think of such projects.
Very Few Greenfield Projects
In my career, nearly everything I’ve worked on has either been a feature for a larger project (and yes, some features can be so big they take entire teams – especially at the enterprise level) or has been maintenance on a pre-existing project.
There are a few years were I worked with a very small team and we were creating several products from scratch. And the reason we were able to do that was because we had started a business of our own and were building and selling the products.
But even after those products had become more established, then we swapped into the phase of maintaining and improving the projects. So if a greenfield project comes your way, it doesn’t always stay that way.
As for now, there’s a lot of work I do that’s either related to internal tooling or based in research and development. There are times where a project may be seem like it’d be greenfield but the requirements usually dictate what’s necessary to start the project. So even then, there are constraints in place.
Do Colleges Teach You Often Get Greenfield Projects?
I don’t know what most colleges, universities, or other courses teach. This statement piqued my curiosity because I think that a lot of projects that teach software development concepts are initially done so in a vacuum. But after a certain point, you’re working with something that already exists – even if it’s small.
Though just about everything I’ve worked on out of school has been on a pre-existing project, there were also plenty of projects I had in school that were focused on adding things to projects that already existed.
Sure, some of the projects were in place so we had to learn how to work with existing codebases, but others – especially during internships – were all about maintaining existing software.
Ultimately, you’re likely to have a mixed experience but I’d venture to say the majority of projects are not greenfield.
If universities or other forms of education aren’t providing you with opportunities to learn how to both build a project from scratch and to maintain existing projects, then I’d be hesitant to consider it a well-rounded education in software development.
Kinsta offers premium managed WordPress hosting for everyone, small or large. Powered by Google Platform, they take performance to the next level. All hosting plans include 24x7 support from their team of WordPress engineers. Get startedwith a free migration today.
If you are looking for WordPress guides and unbiased reviews, I recommend checking out WPKube. They also have an exclusive deals section.
Just Getting Started with WordPress? I write a lot about WordPress development but if you're just getting started, I recommend checking out WPBeginner. They have free training videos, glossary, and more.
