I think it's an interesting thesis, and I like the point about using it to encode domains represented through it (I agree if you want to build non-overcomplicat

I think it's an interesting thesis, and I like the point about using it to encode domains represented through it (I agree if you want to build non-overcomplicated systems, the first major factor is to minimize impedance mismatch with the domain it represents in the base structures you build on, i.e. in the 'language' you develop within your codebase to eventually express domain logic through.) So while I have some issues with this as a generalization (because I think the reality is more diverse): > Because the way software tools work and the way software is written is that it is all completely optimized for short-term business goals and results. —let's assume it now for the sake of argument. What's still weak in the thesis imo is the connection from your proposed better way of approaching software development to longer-term business goals. For instance, I think one possibility is that the typical state of affairs, over a longer time-span, is that what the software itself should even be, what it needs to accomplish, which systems it interacts with etc., is volatile enough that in most cases (there are very important exceptions of course), businesses would do better long term by optimizing for flexibility in changing even the spec for the software, vs devoting more resources to ensuring any individual representation of a software concept is particularly durable. What I'd want to know next on the matter is what evidence exists for the likelihood of one stance over the other being correct. Are there examples of extraordinary long-term success from companies whose approach to development went in the direction of durability (I'll say as an approximation)? Is it a common occurrence for companies to succeed short-term by making sacrifices in quality, and then to fail longer-term specifically because of their over-complex / incoherent, buggy software (or is that more of an exceptional case)?