3 ms·

To add to that, it might be a net benefit to remove unused code even if it ends up breaking something for someone for a while. This endeavour probably won't ad

by tasuki 4y ago

To add to that, it might be a net benefit to remove unused code even if it ends up breaking something for someone for a while. This endeavour probably won't advance your career much, but making one's co-workers lives easier is worthwhile too!

hutzlibu 4y ago
"even if it ends up breaking something for someone for a while." It really depends how urgent those people need that something at that moment (and how much they paid for it). Otherwise this is just making dev life easier on the cost of their users. Before deleting code, why not check who would call that code and why? But yeah, that is also work. (And not always worth the effort)
- kgeist 4y ago
  >Otherwise this is just making dev life easier on the cost of their users. Not necessarily so, I'm expecting removal of dead code will enable faster delivery of new features, and also enable easier refactorings to make code more robust, because the dev team won't have to take unused features into consideration. The code we inherited is very complex and very brittle, so adding something often breaks something else and devs spend way too much time figuring out all the interdependencies. A major complaint is that the dev team doesn't deliver fast enough.
  - hutzlibu 4y ago
    "I'm expecting removal of dead code will enable faster delivery of new features" Well, for sure it does. Getting rid of bloat is always freeing energy - but only if it is really dead code. Otherwise you can introduce rare bugs, or break things in unexpected ways. And yes, sometimes the fastest way is to just try it out and see how things run. If it is not medical equipment, it might be fine even on a live system. It really depends on your project and users. But most users really like stability. Especially if they need that software at that moment, because they have deadlines as well.
kortilla 4y ago
>unused code even if it ends up breaking something for someone for a while. There are industries where this mindset is business ending. It’s pretty much only high volume consumer markets where you can afford to have so little indifference to your customers.
- sitkack 4y ago
  Breaking customers in this way is also immoral. You have no idea how you are impacting their lives with your previously-working but now broken software. Everything is mission critical to someone.
  - TheNewsIsHere 4y ago
    It’s so refreshing to see that written out. This is my reality. For my business, which variously runs email, e-commerce, DNS, and similar for other businesses, our services are mission critical for every customer, and they don’t expect us to touch things we don’t need to touch, or to do things they haven’t asked for specifically. The idea of deleting code without a _thorough_ review of exactly where, why, and by whom it is used for what, is a non-starter. I wouldn’t think of deleting anything unless it was truly dead, and even then I’d take it offline and archive it so I knew what code touched customer data. I actually enjoy this stability. I previously worked for a company with tens of millions of end users (at the time, on-prem and cloud solutions) and a code base stretching back for (at the time) almost 15 years. I don’t miss the pressures that came with that. Edit: typo

by tasuki 4y ago

hutzlibu 4y ago

"even if it ends up breaking something for someone for a while." It really depends how urgent those people need that something at that moment (and how much they paid for it). Otherwise this is just making dev life easier on the cost of their users. Before deleting code, why not check who would call that code and why? But yeah, that is also work. (And not always worth the effort)

kgeist 4y ago
>Otherwise this is just making dev life easier on the cost of their users. Not necessarily so, I'm expecting removal of dead code will enable faster delivery of new features, and also enable easier refactorings to make code more robust, because the dev team won't have to take unused features into consideration. The code we inherited is very complex and very brittle, so adding something often breaks something else and devs spend way too much time figuring out all the interdependencies. A major complaint is that the dev team doesn't deliver fast enough.
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  "I'm expecting removal of dead code will enable faster delivery of new features" Well, for sure it does. Getting rid of bloat is always freeing energy - but only if it is really dead code. Otherwise you can introduce rare bugs, or break things in unexpected ways. And yes, sometimes the fastest way is to just try it out and see how things run. If it is not medical equipment, it might be fine even on a live system. It really depends on your project and users. But most users really like stability. Especially if they need that software at that moment, because they have deadlines as well.

kortilla 4y ago

>unused code even if it ends up breaking something for someone for a while. There are industries where this mindset is business ending. It’s pretty much only high volume consumer markets where you can afford to have so little indifference to your customers.

sitkack 4y ago
Breaking customers in this way is also immoral. You have no idea how you are impacting their lives with your previously-working but now broken software. Everything is mission critical to someone.
- TheNewsIsHere 4y ago
  It’s so refreshing to see that written out. This is my reality. For my business, which variously runs email, e-commerce, DNS, and similar for other businesses, our services are mission critical for every customer, and they don’t expect us to touch things we don’t need to touch, or to do things they haven’t asked for specifically. The idea of deleting code without a _thorough_ review of exactly where, why, and by whom it is used for what, is a non-starter. I wouldn’t think of deleting anything unless it was truly dead, and even then I’d take it offline and archive it so I knew what code touched customer data. I actually enjoy this stability. I previously worked for a company with tens of millions of end users (at the time, on-prem and cloud solutions) and a code base stretching back for (at the time) almost 15 years. I don’t miss the pressures that came with that. Edit: typo