Simplicity Principles
Write code that is simple, necessary, and unsurprising.
Three Core Principles
1. KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid
Simple solutions are better than clever ones
What Simple Means
- Readable by developers of varying skill levels
- Fewer moving parts and abstractions
- Direct and obvious implementation
- Easy to debug and test
- Minimal cognitive load
Elixir Examples
elixir# COMPLEX - Over-engineered defmodule PaymentCalculator do use GenServer def start_link(_), do: GenServer.start_link(__MODULE__, %{}, name: __MODULE__) def calculate(items), do: GenServer.call(__MODULE__, {:calculate, items}) def handle_call({:calculate, items}, _from, state) do result = Enum.reduce(items, Money.new(:USD, 0), &Money.add(&2, &1.price)) {:reply, result, state} end end # SIMPLE - Just a function defmodule PaymentCalculator do def calculate(items) do Enum.reduce(items, Money.new(:USD, 0), &Money.add(&2, &1.price)) end end # Use GenServer only when you need state/concurrency
elixir# COMPLEX - Unnecessary abstraction defmodule UserQuery do defmacro by_status(status) do quote do from u in User, where: u.status == ^unquote(status) end end end # SIMPLE - Direct query def active_users do from u in User, where: u.status == "active" end def inactive_users do from u in User, where: u.status == "inactive" end # Macros only when you need metaprogramming
TypeScript Examples
typescript// COMPLEX - Over-abstraction class UserDataManager { private dataSource: DataSource; private cache: Cache; private transformer: DataTransformer; async getUser(id: string): Promise<User> { const cached = await this.cache.get(id); if (cached) return this.transformer.transform(cached); const raw = await this.dataSource.fetch(id); await this.cache.set(id, raw); return this.transformer.transform(raw); } } // SIMPLE - Direct approach async function getUser(id: string): Promise<User> { const response = await fetch(`/api/users/${id}`); return response.json(); } // Add cache/transform only when performance demands it
typescript// COMPLEX - Clever but confusing const isValid = (x: number) => !!(x >= 0 && x <= 100); const process = (items: number[]) => items.filter(isValid).reduce((a, b) => a + b, 0); // SIMPLE - Clear intent function calculateTotal(scores: number[]): number { const validScores = scores.filter(score => score >= 0 && score <= 100); return validScores.reduce((sum, score) => sum + score, 0); }
KISS Guidelines
- Prefer functions over classes (unless you need state)
- Prefer explicit over implicit
- Prefer boring over clever
- Prefer standard library over custom solutions
- Prefer clear names over short names
- Prefer straightforward logic over "elegant" one-liners
When NOT to KISS
- Performance-critical code (after profiling proves need)
- Preventing code duplication (after third instance)
- Enforcing constraints (types, validations)
2. YAGNI - You Aren't Gonna Need It
Don't implement features until you actually need them
Signs You're Violating YAGNI
- "We might need this someday"
- "Let me add flexibility for future use cases"
- "I'll build a generic solution"
- "This could be configurable"
Elixir Examples (YAGNI)
elixir# YAGNI VIOLATION - Premature abstraction defmodule NotificationService do def send(notification, opts \\ []) do provider = opts[:provider] || :default priority = opts[:priority] || :normal retry_strategy = opts[:retry_strategy] || :exponential callback = opts[:callback] # Complex routing logic for features we don't use yet end end # GOOD - Build what you need now defmodule NotificationService do def send_email(to, subject, body) do Email.send(to, subject, body) end # Add SMS when we actually need it # Add priorities when we have the requirement # Add retries when we see failures end
elixir# YAGNI VIOLATION - Unused flexibility defmodule User do schema "users" do field :email, :string field :settings, :map # "For future configuration" field :metadata, :map # "For anything we might need" field :flags, {:array, :string} # "For feature flags" # None of these are used yet! end end # GOOD - Add fields when needed defmodule User do schema "users" do field :email, :string # Add fields when requirements emerge end end
TypeScript Examples (YAGNI)
typescript// YAGNI VIOLATION - Premature generalization interface DataFetcher<T, P extends object = object> { fetch(params: P): Promise<T>; cache?(params: P): Promise<void>; invalidate?(key: string): Promise<void>; prefetch?(params: P[]): Promise<void>; // We don't use cache, invalidate, or prefetch yet! } // GOOD - Start simple interface DataFetcher<T> { fetch(params: object): Promise<T>; // Add methods when we need caching }
typescript// YAGNI VIOLATION - Configurable everything interface ButtonProps { onClick: () => void; variant?: 'primary' | 'secondary' | 'tertiary' | 'ghost' | 'outline'; size?: 'xs' | 'sm' | 'md' | 'lg' | 'xl'; shape?: 'rounded' | 'square' | 'pill'; shadow?: 'none' | 'sm' | 'md' | 'lg'; animation?: 'fade' | 'slide' | 'bounce'; // Design only uses 2 variants and 1 size! } // GOOD - Implement what designs require interface ButtonProps { onClick: () => void; variant?: 'primary' | 'secondary'; // Only what we use // Add options when design requires them }
YAGNI Guidelines
- Implement features when you have a concrete use case, not a hypothetical one
- Delete unused code immediately (it's in git)
- Start with hardcoded values, extract constants when they vary
- Build for today's requirements, refactor for tomorrow's
- Question every "nice to have" and "might need"
Exceptions to YAGNI
- Security features (implement defense in depth upfront)
- Data migrations (plan schema carefully)
- Public APIs (harder to change later)
- Accessibility (build in from start)
3. Principle of Least Astonishment (POLA)
Code should behave the way users expect it to behave
What Makes Code Astonishing
- Unexpected side effects
- Inconsistent naming
- Breaking conventions
- Hidden behavior
- Surprising return values
Elixir Examples (POLA)
elixir# ASTONISHING - Updates AND returns different thing def update_user(user, attrs) do Repo.update!(User.changeset(user, attrs)) UserCache.invalidate(user.id) # Side effect! :ok # Returns :ok instead of updated user!? end # EXPECTED - Clear behavior def update_user(user, attrs) do Repo.update(User.changeset(user, attrs)) # Caller handles cache invalidation explicitly end
elixir# ASTONISHING - Function name lies def get_user(id) do case Repo.get(User, id) do nil -> attrs = %{id: id, email: "#{id}@example.com"} Repo.insert!(User.changeset(attrs)) # Created user in a getter! user -> user end end # EXPECTED - Name matches behavior def get_or_create_user(id) do case Repo.get(User, id) do nil -> create_default_user(id) user -> user end end
TypeScript Examples (POLA)
typescript// ASTONISHING - Function mutates input function processTask(gig: Task): Task { gig.status = 'processed'; // Mutates input! gig.processedAt = new Date(); return gig; } // EXPECTED - Pure function function processTask(gig: Task): Task { return { ...gig, status: 'processed', processedAt: new Date(), }; }
typescript// ASTONISHING - Inconsistent return types async function getUser(id: string): Promise<User | null | undefined> { // Returns null sometimes, undefined other times, no pattern } // EXPECTED - Consistent return async function getUser(id: string): Promise<User | null> { // Always null when not found }
typescript// ASTONISHING - Breaking conventions interface Props { onPress?: () => void; // React convention: onX clickHandler?: () => void; // Different convention in same interface! onTapGesture?: () => void; // Yet another name for same thing! } // EXPECTED - Consistent conventions interface Props { onPress?: () => void; onLongPress?: () => void; onDoublePress?: () => void; }
POLA Guidelines
- Follow framework conventions (Phoenix, React, Relay)
- Use clear, descriptive names that match behavior
- Return what the function name promises
- Keep side effects explicit or avoid them
- Be consistent within the codebase
- Match platform conventions (iOS, Android, Web)
- Honor principle of least surprise in APIs
Examples of Good POLA in YourApp
- Command handlers return
{:ok, result}or{:error, reason}(consistent) - React components with
onPressnotonClick(platform convention) - Ecto changesets don't touch database (pure validation)
- GraphQL mutations clearly named:
createTask,updateTask,deleteTask
Application Checklist
Before implementing
- Is this the simplest solution? (KISS)
- Do we actually need this now? (YAGNI)
- Will this behavior surprise users? (POLA)
During implementation
- Prefer straightforward over clever
- Implement only what's required
- Follow established conventions
- Name things accurately
- Make side effects explicit
During code review
- Is there a simpler approach?
- Are we building speculative features?
- Does the API behave as expected?
- Are conventions followed?
Red Flags
KISS Violations
- "Let me show you this clever trick..."
- More than 3 levels of abstraction
- Requires 10-minute explanation
- Uses advanced language features unnecessarily
YAGNI Violations
- "We might need this later..."
- Unused parameters/options
- Configurable everything
- "Generic framework" for 2 use cases
POLA Violations
- "Well, technically it does..."
- Inconsistent naming
- Hidden side effects
- Surprising error conditions
Integration with Existing Skills
Works with
solid-principles: Simple implementations of SOLID patternsboy-scout-rule: Simplify when improving codetest-driven-development: Simple code is easier to testelixir-code-quality-enforcer: Credo flags complexitytypescript-code-quality-enforcer: Linting enforces consistency
Remember
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." - Leonardo da Vinci
- Prefer boring, proven solutions over novel approaches
- Build incrementally based on actual requirements
- Follow conventions so code behaves as expected
- Delete speculative code immediately
- Simple != simplistic (handle errors, edge cases properly)

