I’m curious how software can be created and evolve over time. I’m afraid that at some point, we’ll realize there are issues with the software we’re using that can only be remedied by massive changes or a complete rewrite.

Are there any instances of this happening? Where something is designed with a flaw that doesn’t get realized until much later, necessitating scrapping the whole thing and starting from scratch?

  • 0x0
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    6 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    I’d counter that with monolithic, legacy apps without any testing trying to refactor can be a real pain.

    I much prefer starting from scratch, while trying to avoid past mistakes and still maintaining the old app until new up is ready. Then management starts managing and new app becomes old app. Rinse and repeat.

      • msage
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        6 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Which is something I always try to explain to juniors: writing code is cool, but for your sake learn how to READ code.

        Not just understanding what it does, but what was it all meant to do. Even reading your own code is a skill that needs some focus.

        Side note: I hate it to my core when people copy code mindlessly. Sometimes it’s not even a bug, or a performance issue, but something utterly stupid and much harder to read. But because they didn’t understand it, and didn’t even try, they just copy-pasted it and went on. Ugh.

        • teawrecks
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Side note: I hate it to my core when people copy code mindlessly

          Get ready for the world of AI code assist 😬

        • teawrecks
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          6 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Hah yeah, this was in the back of my mind. I forgot the context of it, though, thanks.