I highly endorse the use of libraries and frameworks. However, there is a limit where they are used because they exist, rather than because they are needed. Use of several geo-spatial libraries leads me to believe they are being overused.
Of more concern to me is the unreadable nature of the code. A few features I look for in good code:
- Clear easy to read code. (A manager with minimal understanding of the language should be able to understand the code.)
- Small modules which are have one clear purpose and limited dependencies. (high cohesion and low coupling).
- Well formatted code which is easy to scan.
- Comments explaining what is being done where necessary.
- Limited duplication of code, no duplication of functionality.
- Consistent use of the languages standard libraries.
- Appropriate use of frameworks and libraries. (These should be project/organization standards.)
Unfortunately, there are a lot of developers who haven't leaned to value of the above factors. No matter how complex the problem, it should be broken down into simpler components that are assembled into a solution. Any components which remain complex should have a documented reason why it is done the way it is. (There should be a valid reason.)
EDIT: If the entire solution is less than 60 lines long, then it may be appropriate to do it in one method. The source file should have several methods all of which are of a reasonable size. If there are longer methods, it likely they need re-factoring. I am concerned with the number of geo-spatial libraries being used for a simple problem. (However, I have seen some simple problems for which the solution is very complex.)