> quests to create something complicated with rigid adherence to pure/dogmatic/'perfect' abstraction end up this way Never been a gamemaster, then? A GM/DM/wha

> quests to create something complicated with rigid adherence to pure/dogmatic/'perfect' abstraction end up this way Never been a gamemaster, then? A GM/DM/whatever-M would know how to deal with that. It's a "solved problem" in meatspace. > Contrary to what many think, I don't think spaghetti nightmares happen in this mode unless code becomes functionally immortal by means other than battle testing I don't think contrary-wise, but I really don't know what you mean. At all. I've re-read several times. You sound like you've seen things we people would not believe . . . attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion . . . C-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhauser gate . . . > I remember wanting to feel like the thing I made was absolutely crystalline. Seeing how that ends This seems like a problem of a programmer who does not understand the domain. FWIW, that's not new ground either. You're standing on the shoulders of giants. Consider that Admiral Hopper's contribution to computing, the person oft-claimed as inspiration for women in computing, after a lifetime, that contribution was . . . COBOL. Things go wrong. It's ok. We can fix it. It's only software!