4 ms·
In my experience the 'traps' left by the DM, actually reflect the inherent complexity of the problem domain. Complexity it took months or years to fully underst
by sago 10y ago
In my experience the 'traps' left by the DM, actually reflect the inherent complexity of the problem domain. Complexity it took months or years to fully understand, made out of corner cases and strange usage patterns that were never anticipated, and have been forgotten again since (forgotten, but still used, from time to time).
If you think this new trendy solution is going to be cleaner or less hacky, and still cover the same (or more) use cases, you're rather naive.
80% of the ugliness comes from getting the last 20% of the functionality (maybe even 90/10). It is trivially easy to re-engineer a system that is 80% less ugly/hacky, and covers 80% of the functionality of its predecessor. Then everyone slaps themselves on the back because the refactor is going great!.
- giovannibajo1 10y agoIt's also true that 90% of users only need 10% of the features of your software. If you decide to drop some features that introduce huge complexity that is not apparent, you might find out that users don't really need (anymore? ever?) that feature in that form, and you might make them achieve the same goal through a different features set that doesn't affect the architecture and code complexity that much.
- rubbsdecvik 10y agoSure, but consumer/customer re-education is required and usually underestimated. Attrition due to change is a real thing.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- WorldMaker 10y agoYou just have to beware the corollary that not all users use the same 10%.