• Samskara@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    23 hours ago

    In my experience there’s usually a confluence of individual and institutional failures.

    It usually goes like this.

    1. hotshot developers is hired at company with crappy software
    2. hotshot dev pitches a complete rewrite that will solve all issues
    3. complete rewrite is rejected
    4. hotshot dev shoehorns a new architecture and trendy dependencies into the old codebase
    5. hotshot new dev leaves
    6. software is more complex, inconsistent, and still crappy
    • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      That’s one of the failure modes, good orgs would have design and review processes to stop it.

      There are other classics like arbitrary deadlines, conflicting and shifting requirements and product direction, perverse incentives, etc.

      I would even say that the AI craze is a result of the latter.

      • PapstJL4U@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Yeah, certain code developed organically (aka shifting demands). Devs know the code gets worse, but either by time or money they don’t have the option to review and redo code.