4 ms·
If you are a developer and good at what you do, you will layer your application to buffer against changes. If you aren't then just write the code the best you k
by partisan 10y ago
If you are a developer and good at what you do, you will layer your application to buffer against changes. If you aren't then just write the code the best you know how because building a business AND learning how to be a good coder at the same time is not the most efficient path. That path is littered with constantly rewritten, half-finished, failures.
Get a product out and then figure out where you could have done better.
- stcredzero 10y agoIf you are a developer and good at what you do, you will layer your application to buffer against changes. That's a good place to start. That's 80's and 90's best practice, though. (Most of the industry is stuck in this mindset, to be fair.) I'd say the 21st century version of this would be to structure your code in such a way that transformation tools can be easily applied.
- partisan 10y agoSo you understand my point.
- stcredzero 10y agoThe code architecture "win" is always to dodge the big manual rewrite. The "lose" is to have to do the big manual rewrite. People make it into a game of ideological purism, but really, it's as simple and pragmatic as just that. They who dodge the manual rewrite -- those are the real gurus.
- partisan 10y agoBeing a guru and finishing product have close to 0 correlation. It doesn't matter how you would've/could've/should've done it if in the end, you didn't do it. I'm just trying to encourage OP to finish a product and we've gone pretty far from that starting point with this discussion.
- stcredzero 10y agoBeing a guru and finishing product have close to 0 correlation. Finishing a project and the number of large-scale manual rewrites tend to be negatively correlated.