4 ms·

Wow, something clicked while I was reading that. Wasabi is the result of following "Things You Should Never Do [1]" as a motto. Not that it's a bad thing (it's

by lt 11y ago

Wow, something clicked while I was reading that. Wasabi is the result of following "Things You Should Never Do [1]" as a motto. Not that it's a bad thing (it's not), but it just explains so much. [1] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html

DannoHung 11y ago
And yet... they ended up doing just that? But only after pouring tons of time and energy into not doing so.
- mwcampbell 11y ago
  At what point was FogBugz rewritten?
  - DannoHung 11y ago
    Presumably some time before they killed Wasabi? Am I misunderstanding at a fundamental what the heck Wasabi is?
    - krallja 11y ago
      Wasabi is a compiler. The output of Wasabi was C# code. One day, I deleted Wasabi and checked in the C# code. I did not have to rewrite FogBugz in the slightest.
      - DannoHung 11y ago
        Ohhh, I thought the target was CLR. I didn't realize it was a transpiler.
        spopejoy 11y ago
        Ohhh, I thought the target was CLR. I didn't realize it was a compiler. FTFY
        krallja 11y ago
        transpiler ⊂ compiler
      - lifeisstillgood 11y ago
        (lightbulb!) but, and maybe they were also recompiled, did you keep your tests as well?
        krallja 11y ago
        Most of them are NUnit tests, which don't care what source language the assembly under test is written in. A few of the oldest FogBugz tests are in `unitTest.asp` and were written in Wasabi. They got transpiled over to C# like everything else. Some are confirming Wasabi language features (e.g. `testLambda`, `testDictionary`, `testErrorHandling`), so I could remove them. All of Wasabi's unit tests were deleted with Wasabi.
SiVal 11y ago
Yes, I noticed that this story was a parable of what happens when a charismatic leader declares something taboo, because of all the unforeseen problems it always causes, so the acolytes resort to a workaround that has the same problems in a different form but does not violate the religious taboo. There is inevitably a Law of Conservation of Coding Cost that will get you one way or another. If you won't rewrite your code from scratch (because of all the unrecognized wisdom in the old code), you'll build a compiler from scratch (and discover all the unrecognized wisdom in proven compilers), or you'll switch to some proven cross-platform solution that will cover most of your needs, but the remaining pieces needed to complete the job, when added together, will introduce you to all the unrecognized wisdom embodied in the standard, platform-specific toolchains, or some other approach that will preserve the cost in some other way. This "never rewrite from scratch" dogma is an example of incomplete wisdom.
- kbenson 11y ago
  I think it's related to the Waterbed Theory[1]. Or, put another way, there's no free lunch. The bill will be paid, either now or later, by you or someone else. You're probably better shifting responsibility than time... 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterbed_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterbed_theory
- gknoy 11y ago
  I disagree. Joel's "Don't rewrite from scratch" mantra seems like pretty solid risk-avoidance, given his first-hand experience with that path. The cost to build and maintain Wasabi was surely higher than rewriting as X, but the risk sounds substantially less, and effectively spreads the risk part of technical debt over future years. Thistle came out TEN YEARS ago, and Wasabi isn't much younger. Choosing the path they did arguably contributed to them being able to survive this whole time - and, having read Joel's creed on rewrites, I'm not sure they'd have done better if they rewrote as Python or Javascript.
  - TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
    That was my take on it. A bad rewrite could have killed the company. Historically, rewrites do not have a good delivery record. A sideways sort-of-DIY ever-expanding transpiler-or-whatever kept the project alive and profitable. Sometimes an ugly hack is the right answer if it keeps the money coming in. Also, valuable PR.

by lt 11y ago

DannoHung 11y ago

And yet... they ended up doing just that? But only after pouring tons of time and energy into not doing so.

mwcampbell 11y ago
At what point was FogBugz rewritten?
- DannoHung 11y ago
  Presumably some time before they killed Wasabi? Am I misunderstanding at a fundamental what the heck Wasabi is?
  - krallja 11y ago
    Wasabi is a compiler. The output of Wasabi was C# code. One day, I deleted Wasabi and checked in the C# code. I did not have to rewrite FogBugz in the slightest.
    - DannoHung 11y ago
      Ohhh, I thought the target was CLR. I didn't realize it was a transpiler.
      - spopejoy 11y ago
        Ohhh, I thought the target was CLR. I didn't realize it was a compiler. FTFY
        krallja 11y ago
        transpiler ⊂ compiler
    - lifeisstillgood 11y ago
      (lightbulb!) but, and maybe they were also recompiled, did you keep your tests as well?
      - krallja 11y ago
        Most of them are NUnit tests, which don't care what source language the assembly under test is written in. A few of the oldest FogBugz tests are in `unitTest.asp` and were written in Wasabi. They got transpiled over to C# like everything else. Some are confirming Wasabi language features (e.g. `testLambda`, `testDictionary`, `testErrorHandling`), so I could remove them. All of Wasabi's unit tests were deleted with Wasabi.

SiVal 11y ago

Yes, I noticed that this story was a parable of what happens when a charismatic leader declares something taboo, because of all the unforeseen problems it always causes, so the acolytes resort to a workaround that has the same problems in a different form but does not violate the religious taboo. There is inevitably a Law of Conservation of Coding Cost that will get you one way or another. If you won't rewrite your code from scratch (because of all the unrecognized wisdom in the old code), you'll build a compiler from scratch (and discover all the unrecognized wisdom in proven compilers), or you'll switch to some proven cross-platform solution that will cover most of your needs, but the remaining pieces needed to complete the job, when added together, will introduce you to all the unrecognized wisdom embodied in the standard, platform-specific toolchains, or some other approach that will preserve the cost in some other way. This "never rewrite from scratch" dogma is an example of incomplete wisdom.

kbenson 11y ago
I think it's related to the Waterbed Theory[1]. Or, put another way, there's no free lunch. The bill will be paid, either now or later, by you or someone else. You're probably better shifting responsibility than time... 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterbed_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterbed_theory
gknoy 11y ago
I disagree. Joel's "Don't rewrite from scratch" mantra seems like pretty solid risk-avoidance, given his first-hand experience with that path. The cost to build and maintain Wasabi was surely higher than rewriting as X, but the risk sounds substantially less, and effectively spreads the risk part of technical debt over future years. Thistle came out TEN YEARS ago, and Wasabi isn't much younger. Choosing the path they did arguably contributed to them being able to survive this whole time - and, having read Joel's creed on rewrites, I'm not sure they'd have done better if they rewrote as Python or Javascript.
- TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
  That was my take on it. A bad rewrite could have killed the company. Historically, rewrites do not have a good delivery record. A sideways sort-of-DIY ever-expanding transpiler-or-whatever kept the project alive and profitable. Sometimes an ugly hack is the right answer if it keeps the money coming in. Also, valuable PR.