"Why We Shouldn’t Celebrate beautiful code"

We’ve all seen it—code so intricate and pristine in its structure that it belongs in a museum, not a repository. It’s the kind of code you stare at in awe for a moment… until you realize you need to debug it. Then, like the rest of us mere mortals, you’re left wondering why someone decided to write JavaScript as if they were penning the next great American novel.

Let’s get something straight: beautiful code is only beautiful if it’s useful. If your team needs a Ph.D. in Esoteric Syntax to figure out how a feature works, congratulations—you’ve created a masterpiece that no one will ever maintain.

Here’s why you should resist the urge to create overly clever code and what to do instead. Buckle up; examples are coming.

The Allure of Over-Engineered Elegance

First, let’s examine why developers write this kind of code.

• It feels good. Writing clever code scratches an intellectual itch. It’s a flex, a “look what I can do” moment.
• It impresses (some) people. Until those same people are tasked with maintaining it. Then, it just frustrates them.
• It shows mastery. Or at least it’s supposed to. But real mastery isn’t about creating complexity; it’s about solving problems simply.

Example 1: The “WTF” Factory Function

Here’s a gem I stumbled across recently:

constcreateMultiplier=(x)=>(y)=>(z)=>x*y*z;constmultiply=createMultiplier(2)(3);console.log(multiply(4));// Outputs 24

Beautiful? Sure. But good luck to the junior dev who has to figure out what’s going on here. Three layers of functions to multiply three numbers? Congratulations, you’ve turned arithmetic into an Olympic event.

Don’t do this. Here’s the same functionality written for humans:

functionmultiplyThreeNumbers(x,y,z){returnx*y*z;}console.log(multiplyThreeNumbers(2,3,4));// Outputs 24

Readable. Simple. Maintains everyone’s sanity.

Example 2: The Shakespearean Promise Chain

Now let’s talk about promise chains that look like they were ghostwritten by Shakespeare:

fetch(url).then((response)=>response.json()).then((data)=>data.map((item)=>item.isActive?{...item,status:"active"}:{...item,status:"inactive"})).then((updatedData)=>updatedData.reduce((acc,curr)=>curr.status==="active"?{...acc,active:[...acc.active,curr]}:{...acc,inactive:[...acc.inactive,curr]},{active:[],inactive:[]})).then((finalResult)=>console.log(finalResult)).catch((error)=>console.error(error));

This code works. But it’s also a crime against anyone who has to maintain it. Why is every step of data transformation nested inside the next like a Russian doll?

Let’s refactor:

asyncfunctionprocessData(url){try{constresponse=awaitfetch(url);constdata=awaitresponse.json();constupdatedData=data.map((item)=>({...item,status:item.isActive?"active":"inactive",}));constfinalResult=updatedData.reduce((acc,curr)=>{if(curr.status==="active"){acc.active.push(curr);}else{acc.inactive.push(curr);}returnacc;},{active:[],inactive:[]});console.log(finalResult);}catch(error){console.error(error);}}processData(url);

Breaking the logic into steps makes the code readable. It’s still doing the same thing, but now it’s clear what’s happening at each stage.

Why Simple Is Better

When it comes to software, remember this golden rule: your code is not a personal diary. It’s a communication tool. If your team can’t read it, they can’t work with it. And if they can’t work with it, the business can’t move forward.

Here’s why simplicity wins:

1 Faster Onboarding: Junior devs shouldn’t need a Rosetta Stone to understand your code.
2 Easier Debugging: When bugs arise (and they will), clear logic makes them easier to pinpoint.
3 Happier Teams: No one likes feeling dumb. Overly clever code alienates your teammates.

The Takeaway

Write code like you’re explaining it to your future self after a rough night of sleep. Be kind to the next developer who has to read your work—because chances are, that developer will be you.

Beautiful code isn’t about how fancy it looks; it’s about how effectively it solves problems. Anything less is just an exercise in vanity.