4 ms·
I disagree, and agree with Mark Seemann's take[0]. If something is better, switch to it even if it causes inconsistencies. Over time you can refactor the old co
by ItsMonkk 5y ago
I disagree, and agree with Mark Seemann's take[0]. If something is better, switch to it even if it causes inconsistencies. Over time you can refactor the old code.
You've limited your projects progression to if a billion dollar company has created a framework that is more productive such that they can be taught it in University. You'll never get hackers like pg who can code LISP if you go that route. You should hire good talent and then train them such that they understand, and hopefully keep them and they stay long after they work on your one project.
[0]: https://blog.ploeh.dk/2021/05/17/against-consistency/ https://blog.ploeh.dk/2021/05/17/against-consistency/
- ehnto 5y agoI think that's the crux of the disagreement, I explicitly don't want hackers, I want professional software developers to execute a very reasonable software project effectively, which is not everyone's cup of tea. There's plenty of room for hackers in the industry, to go make really cool stuff and make endless cash, and I love the architecture part more than the rest of it so for personal projects that's what I'm all about. But if I want to achieve delivery on time and in an expected format, I want zero hackers, I want career engineers. That is definitely a boring take for some, but that's just part of a maturing industry. Not every project needs to be an R&D project at the same time.
- AstralStorm 5y agoAssuming that you will be ever allowed to refactor properly rather than be put under immense pressure to fix other things right now.