4 ms·
> where afraid to touch for good reasons This appears entirely unreasonable. Normally the reason is not good. The reason is that unit testing is missing or th
by tossandthrow 2mo ago
> where afraid to touch for good reasons
This appears entirely unreasonable.
Normally the reason is not good. The reason is that unit testing is missing or that downstream effects are not entirely mapped out.
Exactly activities that traditional software developers are loathing because they are boring and mentally straining.
- vkazanov 2mo agoOr the reason is that something is just unfeasible with the existing architecture, or the reason is that building this would break important technical assumptions... All kinds of things.
- greggoB 2mo ago> This appears entirely unreasonable. Seems a bit strong. Unit testing can get you some of the way, but its not a full-on all-case guarantee. Sometimes the code is encapsulating some particularly complex system/behaviour. Sometimes the reason is interop/compatilibity issues or some kind of politics. P.S. you managed to introduce a typo in your quote (were –> where)
- tossandthrow 2mo agoWhat appears unreasonable is that the reasons must be good. This comes directly after they wrote "statements we can't verify". Why is it that we can not verify the statements, but we can believe the reasons that people will not touch the code base to be "good"?
- tossandthrow 2mo agoOh, I did notice t introduce the typo. The commenter corrected after quoted.