[dheera]

> You're not wrong here, but there's a big difference in programming one-off tooling or prototype MVPs and programming things that need to be maintained for years and years.

Humans also worry about their jobs, especially in PIP-happy companies; they are very well known for writing intentionally over-complicated code that only they understand so that they are irreplaceable

[XorNot]

I'm not convinced this actually happens. Seems more like somthing people assume happens because they don't like whatever codebase is at the new job.

[SkyBelow]

The challenge is that sufficiently bad code could be intentional or it could be from a lack of skill.

For example, I've seen a C# application where every function takes in and outputs an array of objects, supposedly built that way so the internal code can be modified without ever having to worry about the contract breaking. It was just as bad as you are imagining, probably worse. Was that incompetence or building things to be so complicated that others would struggle to work on it?

[mistrial9]

but that is literally how the browser window DOM works, no? It depends on how diligent the maintenance is IMHO

[baq]

If your TC is 500k-1M and you don’t feel like job hopping anymore, you’d certainly not want to get hit by a random layoff due to insufficient organizational masculinity or whatever. Maintaining a complex blob of mission critical code is one way of increasing your survival chances, though of course nothing is guaranteed.

[LtWorf]

People doing layoffs have no idea of who works and who's warming the chair.

[baq]

Depending on the layoff they may look into yearly reviews... or not.

[LtWorf]

Ah yes, those work /s

[dheera]

Oh, I'm convinced, I've seen it first hand.

[mistrial9]

hmm I have seen conda env with far too many packages and maybe a lot of current version bumping, and the dev says "who cares" and it naturally gets a bit more.. Intentionally complicated is more like an accusation of wrongdoing.