3 ms·

I don't know about "forced" deletions, but I actually feel deleting unused/old/crusty/etc.. code is cathartic. I don't need any pressure to do it, am I alone on

I don't know about "forced" deletions, but I actually feel deleting unused/old/crusty/etc.. code is cathartic. I don't need any pressure to do it, am I alone on this? Also, I have some awesome code I wrote over 10 years ago, and I wouldn't dream of deleting it. There's moments where you make a decision on something, and years later you look the code and say "Who wrote this? This is great!" oh wait... Code as inventory almost goes hand in hand with coders and machines or assembling line workers. I don't think this is a good direction to take.

rossdavidh 8y ago
I do think that, in my experience, most organizations don't think the amount of code they already have written, is a thing they need to minimize or even track. Yet, most organizations are limited in their ability to develop, by the amount of already existing code that has to be understood and maintained. The usual attitude seems to be that "it's already written, we don't have to pay anything more for that". The idea that existing code, the sheer quantity of it, is a drag on an organization's ability to write new code, was not clearly understood in any place I've ever worked.
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  Would you say that the larger the organization, or perhaps more accurately, the further a developer is separated from "owning" their code, the worse this issue is? In my case, if my code causes a bug, I have a very few steps between the person reporting the bug and the complaint getting to me. It feels personal. Your suggestion seems to imply it's just money, but how do bean counters effect ground level code decisions in an organization?
  - rossdavidh 8y ago
    I think that, it's not money per se, but as you say the number of people between the developer and the decision maker. The only person who perceives the problem of having too much code, is the developer (and then only sometimes). Organizations do well at optimizing what they track, in many cases, but they don't track amount of existing code as a negative thing that needs maintaining, so they don't do well at optimizing that.

rossdavidh 8y ago

I do think that, in my experience, most organizations don't think the amount of code they already have written, is a thing they need to minimize or even track. Yet, most organizations are limited in their ability to develop, by the amount of already existing code that has to be understood and maintained. The usual attitude seems to be that "it's already written, we don't have to pay anything more for that". The idea that existing code, the sheer quantity of it, is a drag on an organization's ability to write new code, was not clearly understood in any place I've ever worked.

RobertRoberts 8y ago
Would you say that the larger the organization, or perhaps more accurately, the further a developer is separated from "owning" their code, the worse this issue is? In my case, if my code causes a bug, I have a very few steps between the person reporting the bug and the complaint getting to me. It feels personal. Your suggestion seems to imply it's just money, but how do bean counters effect ground level code decisions in an organization?
- rossdavidh 8y ago
  I think that, it's not money per se, but as you say the number of people between the developer and the decision maker. The only person who perceives the problem of having too much code, is the developer (and then only sometimes). Organizations do well at optimizing what they track, in many cases, but they don't track amount of existing code as a negative thing that needs maintaining, so they don't do well at optimizing that.