In any coding task, the best practices are a set of informal rules that the software development community has learned in time which could help boost the quality of the program. A lot of the computer program remains useful for far longer than the original authors imagined, some even up to forty years or more. That is why; any rules must facilitate initial development and subsequent enhancement and maintenance by people aside from the original authors.
Most of the time, developers do the appropriate thing. On rare instances that they don’t, bad things could occur. Avoiding these bad practices could make the work easier and makes the software more scalable and secure to boot. In the software programming and software development field, the principle could be summarized by saying that most issues are caused by a little amount of bad coding practices. Eliminating these could make the task more productive and much easier.
The following are the ten bad coding practices that could destroy any development project and must be avoided in order to create effective solutions.
Surprisingly, these are common and quite maddening since they have nothing to do with the developer’s programming skill. Even so, a misspelled variable function or name could wreak havoc on cryptogram. Furthermore, they may not be easy to see. The solution would be to work in a good integrated software development environment or IDE or a programmer-centric text editor even could significantly reduce errors. Another thing that could be done is to intentionally choosing function and variable names which could be spelled easily, and thus easy to spot when misspelled. Refrain from using words like as receive, which could be misspelled recieve without being obvious.
2. Failure to Modularize Cryptogram:
It is a good practice to write functions that perform one thing and that thing alone. This helps them keep short and so, easy to comprehend and maintain. Long functions have a lot of possible paths through them, which make them harder to test. A good rule of thumb would be that one function must occupy no more space than one screen. Another is it contains ten or more ‘if’ loops or statements, then it is too complex and must be rewritten.
3. Hard-Coding Passwords:
It is tempting to hardcore a secret password and account so one could get into the system later. But, this should not be done. It is extremely convenient, for anyone to access the source cipher. The true issue is that a hardcore password eventually would be more widely known than intended. This makes it a big security risk, not to mention a very inconvenient fix.
4. Failure of Using Good Encryption For Data Protection:
Sensitive data must be encrypted as it travels over the network. This is because it is vulnerable to interception when it does so. It is not only a wonderful idea, but a regulatory requirement, if not the law. This means sending data in the clear is a ‘no, no.’ Writing one’s own encryption system is difficult, thus it is necessary to use a proven industry standard encryption library and correctly use it.
5. Not Being Able To Format or Indent:
Indenting and otherwise formatting code makes it easier to comprehend at a glance and so see errors. Moreover, it also makes it much easier for others to maintain it, since it is presented in a consistent manner. When using an IDE that does not format the code automatically, consider running it via a code beautifier like Uncrustify. It would format it consistently based on the configured rules.
6. Unable To Think Ahead:
A programmer should think things ahead, such as what the project is for, how much it is expected to scale, the number of users it would have and how fast it should run. The answers to these may not be available, but if one fails to make estimates, then it is impossible to select a suitable framework to develop the app that would be able to meet the requirements.
7. Letting the IDE Lure One into A False Sense Of Security:
The IDEs and other tools which provide completion are great for productivity. They suggest variables as well as other things which are based on what is in scope, given what is being typed already. However, there is a danger with this kind of tool since a developer could choose something because it looks the same as one is expected without taking necessary effort to make sure that it is exactly what is needed. In essence, the device does the thinking, when a programmer in fact is making certain the thinking is correct. Nevertheless, there is a fine line to be drawn. The completion tools could help eliminate errors like typos and boot productivity.
8. Adding People For Making Up For Time Lost:
Almost each software project falls behind the given schedule. Adding people to the task to get it back on track will sound such a good idea in theory. Nevertheless, it is a common mistake. The fact is, adding new people to a task almost always results in a plunge in the overall productivity.
9. Prematurely Optimizing a Code:
Donald Knuth, a popular and legendary programmer said that programmers waste a great amount of time worrying, or thinking about the speed of non- vital parts of the programs. Moreover, these attempts at efficiency actually have a robust negative effect when maintenance and debugging are taken into consideration. Being clever with the process could make it run infinitesimally faster. However, it makes it much harder to maintain and to debug. A better strategy would be to write clearly, and then get to work in any parts which truly need optimization in order to enhance performance.
10. Utilizing Known Bad Time Estimates:
It is also important to avoid the temptation to imagine that one could catch up with the schedule later without adding people to a project. If one falls behind the schedule, it is because the estimates were wrong. This means one should make a new estimate of the project length, not stick to an estimate blindly, one that has been proven wrong already.