3 ms·

"but overall what I gained translates into Getting Things Done. " This. I don't pump ridiculous amounts of code, but what I do, Works, and is mostly bug free o

by fsloth 10y ago

"but overall what I gained translates into Getting Things Done. " This. I don't pump ridiculous amounts of code, but what I do, Works, and is mostly bug free or easily repairable. Thus I have a reputation as a guy who gets things done. Companies should really be aware of the maintenance overhead caused by fixing old badly done code. Maybe it's the market dynamics. Most code bases are new (their age is not measured in decades) so the organizations have not gained the institutional understanding what a sinkhole of profits badly executed code is. Some companies use this as a business model an charge "maintenance costs" and such things so there is also the pathological motivation to maintain this status quo of "implement cheaply, fix expensively"

Bartweiss 10y ago
> Companies should really be aware of the maintenance overhead caused by fixing old badly done code. This is a fascinating theory on programming ageism. It's common knowledge that most software buyers undervalue tech debt and the costs of maintenance/upgrades. That presumably translates for less interest in planning, experience, and thoroughness compared to speed. And most of that isn't controversial, but I rarely see it raised in the context of preferring young and inexperienced devs. I suspect there's at least some truth to it, because highly self-aware software companies seem uncommonly willing to poach older experts.
StavrosK 10y ago
I have a developer friend in his 50s. He writes the most solid code I've ever seen. I'd be surprised if one of his services hits a major bug in production. However, there's a slight problem: We don't need that level of solidity. The rest of the stack is comparatively less solid, so his time would be better spent getting ten easy, frequently-hit bugs out of the rest of the codebase, rather than get one unlikely-to-hit bug out of his. He hates producing code that's not up to his standard, but when our fleet of cars consists of a Lamborghini he built and a beat-up Yugo some other guy built, I'd rather my friend changed the rusty oil of the Yugo rather than make sure that all the bolts on the Lamborghini are within tolerance.
- gfodor 10y ago
  I 100% agree with this: the lesson to be learned from getting older and being burned by bad code is not that no code should ever be written badly, but that you should learn how and when to care, and by how much. I think too many experienced programmers have been subject to problematic code that they pre-emptively try to make everything bug-free, and very often times that's a huge opportunity cost.

by fsloth 10y ago

Bartweiss 10y ago

> Companies should really be aware of the maintenance overhead caused by fixing old badly done code. This is a fascinating theory on programming ageism. It's common knowledge that most software buyers undervalue tech debt and the costs of maintenance/upgrades. That presumably translates for less interest in planning, experience, and thoroughness compared to speed. And most of that isn't controversial, but I rarely see it raised in the context of preferring young and inexperienced devs. I suspect there's at least some truth to it, because highly self-aware software companies seem uncommonly willing to poach older experts.

StavrosK 10y ago

I have a developer friend in his 50s. He writes the most solid code I've ever seen. I'd be surprised if one of his services hits a major bug in production. However, there's a slight problem: We don't need that level of solidity. The rest of the stack is comparatively less solid, so his time would be better spent getting ten easy, frequently-hit bugs out of the rest of the codebase, rather than get one unlikely-to-hit bug out of his. He hates producing code that's not up to his standard, but when our fleet of cars consists of a Lamborghini he built and a beat-up Yugo some other guy built, I'd rather my friend changed the rusty oil of the Yugo rather than make sure that all the bolts on the Lamborghini are within tolerance.

gfodor 10y ago
I 100% agree with this: the lesson to be learned from getting older and being burned by bad code is not that no code should ever be written badly, but that you should learn how and when to care, and by how much. I think too many experienced programmers have been subject to problematic code that they pre-emptively try to make everything bug-free, and very often times that's a huge opportunity cost.