4 ms·

In my (extremely not senior) view, maintaining other people's monstrosities doesn't teach the right lesson, because there are many ways to get things wrong, but

In my (extremely not senior) view, maintaining other people's monstrosities doesn't teach the right lesson, because there are many ways to get things wrong, but fewer ways to get things right. Previously, maintaining someone else's monstrosity taught me to avoid their specific mistakes, but not those classes of mistakes. I'd momentarily feel superior over having a different idea about how to accomplish those goals, only to feel deflated once my idea also showed short-comings. Better to learn how to reason correctly about these things, and that probably doesn't happen until you take seriously the cost of maintenance, which really only comes once you've spent enough time in those trenches, having dug them yourself.

RandoHolmes 6y ago
> I'd momentarily feel superior over having a different idea about how to accomplish those goals, only to feel deflated once my idea also showed short-comings. That just means you weren't valuing the right things. At the end of the day, that's what it's about. It's not about "technique A should have been used instead of technique B", it's more about what you value. It matters because those values will inform both your decisions and your actions. For example, someone who values performance will not write slow code. Someone who values productivity will write slow code. Someone who values stability may or may not write slow code and may or may not be productive, but their systems won't arbitrarily go down.