3 ms·
Often I get surprised at seeing old projects (mostly websites) still live, get by and work well, but inspecting the code will show the backend is dreadful. Mor
by zapt02 14y ago
Often I get surprised at seeing old projects (mostly websites) still live, get by and work well, but inspecting the code will show the backend is dreadful.
More importantly, it also reinforces a mantra that you only need to build things that are "good enough" for your use case.
- yen223 14y agoWhenever I'm stuck fixing a horrid mess of buggy legacy code, it always strikes me that the code was someone else's idea of "good enough". That's why I no longer subscribe to that mantra.
- saryant 14y agoI think it's still a valid viewpoint. "Good enough" is an opinion and just like all opinions, some are more valid than others. There's a range between "good enough" and "perfect" where plenty of very good products exist. Also, there's the possibility that the horrid mess of buggy legacy code (been there, I feel your pain) wasn't someone's idea of "good enough" in a technical sense but rather "good enough so that my boss doesn't notice." I've had the displeasure of working with those individuals before. They don't care about getting better at coding—they care about flying under the radar and collecting their biweekly paycheck.
- yen223 14y agoThat's true. "Good enough" can range from "it runs" to "written in a well-structured, maintainable manner". Most people choose to stop at #1, and that's fine. Until you have to fix the damn thing.