Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 15th Feb 2013 10:40 UTC
General Development "Since I left my job at Amazon I have spent a lot of time reading great source code. Having exhausted the insanely good idSoftware pool, the next thing to read was one of the greatest game of all time: Duke Nukem 3D and the engine powering it named 'Build'. It turned out to be a difficult experience: The engine delivered great value and ranked high in terms of speed, stability and memory consumption but my enthousiasm met a source code controversial in terms of organization, best practices and comments/documentation. This reading session taught me a lot about code legacy and what helps a software live long." Hail to the king, baby.
Thread beginning with comment 552823
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by Nelson on Mon 18th Feb 2013 18:10 UTC in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

There doesn't exist a situation where code doesn't need maintenance. Assuming so is a stunning display of a lack of forethought.

I've been in many a situation where I've had to maintain code where the original writer was no longer apart of the company.

It is also important to make a distinction between people who want thoughtful and concise design vs people who complain about the spacing of tabs and the line the curly brace goes on.

The latter group are just a bunch of annoying pedants, but the former is an important end to strive towards.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Mon 18th Feb 2013 20:55 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

There doesn't exist a situation where code doesn't need maintenance. Assuming so is a stunning display of a lack of forethought.

Of course there is. Just like there are situations where code needs little maintenance, and where code needs considerable maintenance. Assuming all code needs maintenance is the true stunning display of poor assumption. I guess there are people who haven't heard of backwards-compatibility, not breaking user-space as rule of thumb, ABI, etc. Or that the code is simplistic enough that no changes have been needed in ages (if ever).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 04:14 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Yeah, some of the worst, creakiest, ugliest legacy code I've had the unfortunate job of maintaining is code written by people who think exactly like you.

Code should adhere to good design, period. This isn't about legacy code, or compatibility. The code would be written in the present, and as such, good design could be encouraged from the start.

The goal is to reduce substantially the amount of said ugly code, all while increasing the reliability and maintainability of the code base as a whole.

As a company often we don't control how old code is designed, we do control new code.

Reply Parent Score: 2