👉 Your code has one job. If it’s doing more, it’s broken.

Stop writing methods with trust issues.

Hey you.

Yes, you with the 48-line method and the “quick enhancement” idea.

Let’s talk.

A few weeks ago, I wrote a clean little method.

Its only job?

➡️ Run a standard business partner creation in a test scenario. Nothing fancy. Clear, focused, readable.

Then a teammate updated it.

They added a mapping layer for dynamic variables - to keep the test data valid. Important? Sure. But it didn’t belong there, at least not in the main method.

Suddenly the method was juggling two responsibilities:

• Executing a standard process

• Mapping and transforming variable data

The result? A method that looked like it was written by three different people over three different decades. I had to squint just to understand what it was doing.

Here’s the thing:

If your method has more than one reason to change, it’s not clean - it’s confusing.

That’s the Single Responsibility Principle in action. And when you break it, the cost isn’t visible in syntax. It shows up in:

• Time wasted reading

• Bugs hidden in side-effects

• And devs who silently curse your name on Zoom

What to do instead?

• One method = one job.

• Keep mapping logic in a separate layer.

• Write code your future self doesn’t hate.

Quick test:

Can you describe a method’s purpose in one sentence?

No? Break it apart.

Clean code doesn’t just run. It reads like it was written by someone who cared. - Martin

P.S. Ever had a method like that? One that started clean… and turned into spaghetti?

✍️ Post your worst "one-liner" in the comments. I’ll turn the best into an ABAP meme 😅