5 ms·
Yes we should rewrite it in language Y if everyone on the team is comfortable with the language, it provides nonfunctional benefits, and has potential to drive
by DrBenCarson 4y ago
Yes we should rewrite it in language Y if everyone on the team is comfortable with the language, it provides nonfunctional benefits, and has potential to drive business value.
It’s just about acknowledging the conditions that would make an idea a good one. All ideas are good in a specific context. Instead of assuming everyone’s aware of the current context, state the ideal context for an idea.
- theK 4y agoI'm all for positive language and this sort of feedback. But one needs to keep in mind that this sort of setup can lead to a lot of Yak shaving. So there should be somewhere/someone in the process that addresses the value vs Yak shaving costs.
- vineyardmike 4y agoBut just as ideas exist in a context, so does the decision. If your team (for example) doesn’t have everyone know the language, then “yes if (false)” is just “no”. Businesses move and conditions change so keeping this “no-go” idea around as a “yes if” just means that people will try to resurrect it later. It may be a spurious idea, but you’ve given it a false blessing by attaching a conditional approval.
- humanrebar 4y ago"Yes if you can solve the halting problem" is better than a "no". It's "no, and there are mathematical proofs why it will never be a 'yes'". More realistically, you're more likely to hit "yes if there is compelling evidence that $choice is better than $status_quo with respect to $criteria". Sometimes that sort of evidence is expensive-to-impossible to demonstrate such that it's basically a "no", but again, it's a much more specific "no".
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ilyt 4y agoThat's just roundabout way of saying "no because we don't have experience in Y language"