The first version of the code you write may not be of production quality. It is OK to first concentrate on making the code work, rather than worry over the quality of the code, as long as you improve the quality later. This process of improving a program's internal structure in small steps without modifying its external behavior is called refactoring.
Improving code structure can have many secondary benefits: e.g.
Given below are two common refactorings (more).
Refactoring Name: Consolidate Duplicate Conditional Fragments
Situation: The same fragment of code is in all branches of a conditional expression.
Method: Move it outside of the expression.
Example:
| → |
|
| → |
|
Refactoring Name: Extract Method
Situation: You have a code fragment that can be grouped together.
Method: Turn the fragment into a method whose name explains the purpose of the method.
Example:
void printOwing() {
printBanner();
// print details
System.out.println("name: " + name);
System.out.println("amount " + getOutstanding());
}
void printOwing() {
printBanner();
printDetails(getOutstanding());
}
void printDetails(double outstanding) {
System.out.println("name: " + name);
System.out.println("amount " + outstanding);
}
def print_owing():
print_banner()
# print details
print("name: " + name)
print("amount " + get_outstanding())
def print_owing():
print_banner()
print_details(get_outstanding())
def print_details(amount):
print("name: " + name)
print("amount " + amount)
Some IDEs have builtin support for basic refactorings such as automatically renaming a variable/method/class in all places it has been used.
Refactoring, even if done with the aid of an IDE, may still result in regressions. Therefore, each small refactoring should be followed by regression testing.
Exercises
One way to identify refactoring opportunities is by code smells.
A code smell is a surface indication that usually corresponds to a deeper problem in the system. First, a smell is by definition something that's quick to spot. Second, smells don't always indicate a problem.
--adapted from https://martinfowler.com/bliki/CodeSmell.html
An example (from the same source as above) is the code smell data class i.e., a class with all data and no behavior. When you encounter the such a class, you can explore if refactoring it to move the corresponding behavior into that class is appropriate. Some more examples:
Periodic refactoring is a good way to pay off the technical debt a code base has accumulated.
Software systems are prone to the build up of cruft - deficiencies in internal quality that make it harder than it would ideally be to modify and extend the system further.Technical Debt is a metaphor, coined by Ward Cunningham, that frames how to think about dealing with this cruft, thinking of it like a financial debt. The extra effort that it takes to add new features is the interest paid on the debt.
--https://martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebt.html
While it is important to refactor frequently so as to avoid the accumulation of ‘messy’ code (aka technical debt), an important question is how much refactoring is too much refactoring? It is too much refactoring when the benefits no longer justify the cost. The costs and the benefits depend on the context. That is why some refactorings are ‘opposites’ of each other (e.g. extract method vs inline method).
Resources
Exercises