I think this author has some points, but this is attacking the wrong thing.

Clean code is not the source of the problems described. If you see similar code and try to extract a common abstraction without further consideration, congrats, you're thinking like a junior developer, and that's not Clean Code's fault, to pull one example.

As someone who regularly has to deal with code that has been broken needlessly into smaller functions so that I have to constantly jump around to figure out what is going on, this really resonates with me.

The latest case was someone who took something that really only needed to be a single function and instead turned it into a class with a dozen tiny methods.

So I was coming here with my pitchfork to blabber about how code is written for humans and that it's important to be simple and clear and stuff... but then I realized this was a jab about that dumb book. Fuck that book.

"The cult of understandable things"

Yeah ok bro, sure.

Who doesn't like a gigantic shitty code that "just works" after all?

This is an article by a person who doesn't understand SOLID principles, talking about programmers who don't understand SOLID principles.

Saw this, a long while ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5NrevFtbU

It measures clean code to wreck performance to terrible degree.

From the looks of it, in Molly Rocket's view, clean code is an industry-wronging cult.

They've multiple videos on the subject, from different angles

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=molly+rocket+clean+code

Just putting this here for hopefully-more-accurate-view.

_ /\ _

You see two functions that look similar. Clean Code sirens start blaring in your head. You extract a common abstraction. You add parameters to handle the slight differences. Then more parameters. Then a config object. Then a strategy pattern because you're a Real Engineer™.

I’ve watched dozens of hours of Uncle Bob videos (not by choice) and this isn’t what he advocates. At all.

This author has no clue what they’re talking about.