Hum. It is difficult without delving into specifics.
When I write code I'm always asking myself questions about future code readers. "Is this understandable enough? Are the identifiers concise? Is the intent of this method clear?". If I must spend 15 minutes on a dictionary looking for the exact name for an abstraction, I do so.
Code written by someone without empathy reads to me like its author has mostly asking himself questions related with functionality: "Does this work? Is this fast enough? Am I using an up-to-date API?". You get lots of names with 'info' or 'data' or 'manager'. Several things named the same way. The same thing named different ways in different places. Long methods, with tangled dependencies. Classes hiding inside other classes' methods. "Clever" code which uses obscure language features in non-standard ways. Etc.
Mind you - I also think about functionality, speed, etc. But most of my mental processing is dedicated to thinking about future maintainers.
When I write code I'm always asking myself questions about future code readers. "Is this understandable enough? Are the identifiers concise? Is the intent of this method clear?". If I must spend 15 minutes on a dictionary looking for the exact name for an abstraction, I do so.
Code written by someone without empathy reads to me like its author has mostly asking himself questions related with functionality: "Does this work? Is this fast enough? Am I using an up-to-date API?". You get lots of names with 'info' or 'data' or 'manager'. Several things named the same way. The same thing named different ways in different places. Long methods, with tangled dependencies. Classes hiding inside other classes' methods. "Clever" code which uses obscure language features in non-standard ways. Etc.
Mind you - I also think about functionality, speed, etc. But most of my mental processing is dedicated to thinking about future maintainers.