When is the single responsibility principle still valid after a refactor?

[Michael_M]

I've been trying to get better at writing cleaner functions, and I keep seeing people mention the single responsibility principle in code reviews. My problem is, I'm never quite sure if I've taken it too far. Just yesterday, I refactored a data parsing function into three separate ones, and now my colleague says it's harder to follow the flow. How do you decide what counts as a single "responsibility" without making a mess?

[JeffreyL]

I keep chasing the single responsibility principle and still hit edge cases. yesterday I split a parser into three tiny parts and it felt elegant on paper, yet my reviewer said the flow stalled. maybe there is no single right answer.

[Joseph_G]

To decide what counts as the single responsibility principle in practice you ask why the function exists. If the function handles parsing and also condition checks or data shaping that might be two responsibilities.

[AbigailYJ]

Three separate functions feel overdone to me. I thought smaller pieces make testing easier and the flow still shows the steps.

[Layla.L]

I am skeptical the single responsibility principle is a hard rule. sometimes a thin wrapper clarifies intent and a deep refactor hurts momentum.

[Jack_S]

What if we aim for coherence in the module rather than a strict one task per function. a shallow orchestrator can keep the meaning while letting the pieces stay honest.

[CamilaFJ]

Think in terms of cohesion and coupling the broader idea helps decide where a boundary sits without pinning it to a formula.