3 ms·
> More importantly, no changes over the last few years means that absolutely no one in the company has in-depth and current knowledge of how that code works, so
by ClumsyPilot 2y ago
> More importantly, no changes over the last few years means that absolutely no one in the company has in-depth and current knowledge of how that code works, so a refactor is pointless because no one knows what the specific problems actually are.
reply
That’s is the actual reason you might need to rewrite it.
If your critical system is written in an ancient script that nobody can understand, and does no longer supported, and as a security risk, at some point it will simply stop working. And there will be nobody that can fix it.
Yes, rewrite may be painful, but if you can no longer find the people to support the old thing it may be necessary
- lelanthran 2y ago> If your critical system is written in an ancient script that nobody can understand, and does no longer supported, and as a security risk, at some point it will simply stop working. And there will be nobody that can fix it. > Yes, rewrite may be painful, but if you can no longer find the people to support the old thing it may be necessary I agree, but we weren't talking about rewrites, we were talking about refactors. If you refactor some ancient old COBOL application, the result would be a new COBOL application. If you rewrite some ancient old COBOL application, the result would most probably not be a new COBOL application.