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*

8
  • Hey, I can't reach that link anymore. Do you happen to have a version that's hosted somewhere still accessible? Commented Jan 22, 2017 at 4:12
  • Hi, QPT, good spot. I have brought the blog post back and updated the URL above. It should link now! Commented Jan 28, 2017 at 18:23
  • There's more to it than that though. It's much easier to manage precise execution timing by using SESE. Nested conditionals can often be refactored out with a switch anyway. It's not just about whether or not there's a return value. Commented Apr 18, 2017 at 7:15
  • 3
    Mehrdad, If there is a formal study in support of it, show it. That's all. Insisting on evidence against is shifting the burden of proof. Commented Jun 13, 2017 at 8:10
  • 5
    Come off it, questioning the statement "There is no formal study that shows this" is a textbook case of asking for "proving a negative". A statement "there is no x" is a textbook "negative claim" which "asserts the non-existence or exclusion of something" so you're wrong about that. Also yes, pointless rules are bad when they cause extra work and lead to awkward code. If there's a good reason for it, fine. But there is not, unless you know something that we don't? Commented Sep 3, 2020 at 13:15