|
|
|
|
|
by hinkley
3121 days ago
|
|
I disagree on item 1. My basis for this occurred to me on a contract a few years ago, as I was being scolded for fixing things instead of letting them be because “we’re going to do a rewrite soon” (even though the boss that promised this got promoted out of the org). The promise of a rewrite institutionalized accumulating technical debt. When it comes time to do the rewrite, everyone starts out on the wrong foot. The big rewrite is a lot like New Years resolutions. They don’t stick, they cost money and time, create negative reinforcement and sometimes people get hurt. Refactoring institutionalizes continuous improvement, thinking about code quality, and yet discourages perfectionism because you can always fix it later when you have more info. My theory is that people good at refactoring can handle a rewrite well. Maybe are the only people that can handle a rewrite well. But if you can refactor like that you don’t need a rewrite (or rather, you’ve already done it and nobody noticed). |
|