Comment by cloogshicer
4 years ago
Large companies also do occasional complete re-writes of legacy products. It's not as common (because of course the larger the project, the more expensive it is), but it still happens.
I would also argue that rewriting your code somewhat frequently is part of good engineering. As you discover more of the problem, old code needs to be discarded. Usually what happens is that you start solving problem A, then realize a new need to solve problem B. But really it would've been much better to solve a combination of the two, problem C, which requires an entirely different approach than dumping new code for B onto the old codebase for A.
It's actually part of why I wrote the article, because I do honestly believe it is a common misconception that rewrites are more expensive than modifications (although I'm sure that's true in some cases).
Also, I gotta say, while I appreciate that you took time to comment and chime in with the discussion, the way you worded it was quite rude and a bit hurtful.
> the way you worded it was quite rude and a bit hurtful
You probably just hit some nerve of the person you responded to. Granted, your article was exaggerating about the worthlessness of source code, you made a very good and interesting point grounded in real experience.
On top of that you did something that I think is very important, commendable and interesting: Looking at the history of software engineering and programming. There is a wealth of knowledge and insights at our fingertips and as a culture we're not paying enough attention to history.
And the message is very sound if not taken to the extreme. Source code quality matters and is worth investing in, but people ultimately matter more. It's an important message that needs to be heard again and again.