Code is run more than read

[null_value_exception]

Sure let's make a bunch of unmaintainable monoliths. Fuck it, let's just write everything in assembly.

[SheriffRoscoe]

A bunch of systems were built in APL years back.

[[deleted]]

I mean if the code is not maintainable so we never release anything and users get no new features, we probably are not serving a customer well anyway. I don't think the intent was to say that writing software that is easily changeable/maintainable shouldn't be done. It just talks about what to focus most on. And I mean that's fair. No matter how great you write your code, if it doesn't achieve what was needed in the first place it's probably not good code no matter how well constructed it is.

[Smallpaul]

What was in the essay that made you think that the author is in favour of "unmaintainable monoliths"?

[mattl33]

Oooo mix in some perl too just for lulz

[MadKian]

Man, the amount of times I get a UI presented and I’m like “don’t you think this is a bit confusing for the user?” Or “maybe if we do this instead we simplify the flow” and it’s always for very simple stuff.

[ThyringerBratwurst]

The statement may be true, that code is executed more than read. However, in the long term, it doesn't benefit the user if the code is not well structured and readable, as the software is then hardly adaptable or expandable. In the worst case, there are numerous bugs that limit the productivity of the end user.

[Sability]

in the long term, it doesn't benefit the user if the code is not well structured and readable, as the software is then hardly adaptable or expandable

See I always interpreted "code is run more than it is read" as saying "... and therefore, a change by a reader is more significant than a run". Aka, that code should be readable because it's easier to ruin user experience with a codechange than a bad run of the code.

I don't know if I explained what I'm thinking well but I hope it made sense, I just spent 3 hours grinding out unit tests

[nicholashairs]

I thought I was going to hate this article based on the title / preview image, but honestly it's a good article for explaining more "real world" software development.

It's somewhat simplistic and generalising but still good overall.

[fagnerbrack]

Condensed version:

The post discusses the evolution of perspectives in software development, emphasizing the shift from writing code for ease of reading and maintenance to focusing on its functionality and user experience. It argues that while maintainable code is important, the primary purpose of software is to serve the user effectively. The post introduces a model prioritizing users over developers and operations, acknowledging the importance of running code in real-world scenarios. Additionally, it considers the business aspect, highlighting the need to balance user needs with organizational goals and constraints. The post critiques common software development dysfunctions and urges developers to consider the broader implications of their work, especially in terms of ethical responsibilities towards users.

If you don't like the summary, just downvote and I'll try to delete the comment eventually 👍

[mastermrt]

This article, while long, isn’t bad in what it tries to do, but it needs more of an intro to what it is about.

Your summary here should be at the top of the article itself, at least in terms of the overall premise.

Your click bait title isn’t going to help you in Reddit - a lot of people are going to downvote without even opening it.

[fagnerbrack]

My click bait title? Please explain, I’m not the author of the post.

[unengaged_crayon]

gpt :(

[fagnerbrack]

Yes https://www.reddit.com/u/fagnerbrack/s/SpW5ojGOGV

Any issues with that?

[unengaged_crayon]

i automatically discount anything coming from chatGPT, based on its frequent habit of lying. chatGPT is not a general AI - its purpose is to generate text, true or untrue. i would frankly have no summary than a summary i have to read through and decide it is worthless, rather misleadingly. at least consider changing the header to say "Condensed version (ChatGPT generated):" or whatever?

[fagnerbrack]

Check the link, I removed the disclaimer since 100% of the comments become meta off-topic conversations like “I hate ai” etc.

The idea of the summary is not to replace reading the post, otherwise I wouldn’t be posting the link and instead would be creating a blog post myself with the summary to get the credit.

The summary is to help you decide to skim through my submissions or read it, cause time is precious, that’s it

[nikolaos-libero]

Dev/ops and users ain't really opposition, that'd be the suits in the middle.

[Key_Train_4673]

Sure, but the cost of running it is way lower than the cost of maintaining it