3 ms·
> We could have settled on some GUI/UX, communication, database, knowledge handling, etc. standards decades ago and we could have decided we are not going to re
by foul 3y ago
> We could have settled on some GUI/UX, communication, database, knowledge handling, etc. standards decades ago and we could have decided we are not going to re-implement all the basics of computing all over again all the time because we need our scrollviews to “snap” just right or we need to reimplement IRC again.
We could (sometimes we even did) and still we'd have multi-million industries not aware of/ignoring those conventions for mere economical reasons.
- robocat 3y ago> mere economical reasons Why mere? Can one afford to be uneconomical? Do constraints not matter? Personally one of my definitions of good engineering is making "good compromises" between different needs.
- foul 3y ago>Can one afford to be uneconomical? Sometimes. You can always afford to be cheap, too: that may lead the team to spend the right amount or less, but someone will later spend a lot more, which in SWE parlance is called "re-implement all the basics of computing all over again all the time". I don't know the name of the game where you have to avert that the bigger expenditure comes to hit your team's back. (substitute whatever you want in place of "team": yourself, your firm, your family or clan)