←back to thread

466 points 0x63_Problems | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.273s | source
Show context
dkdbejwi383 ◴[] No.42138113[source]
> However, in ‘high-debt’ environments with subtle control flow, long-range dependencies, and unexpected patterns, they struggle to generate a useful response

I'd argue that a lot of this is not "tech debt" but just signs of maturity in a codebase. Real world business requirements don't often map cleanly onto any given pattern. Over time codebases develop these "scars", little patches of weirdness. It's often tempting for the younger, less experienced engineer to declare this as tech debt or cruft or whatever, and that a full re-write is needed. Only to re-learn the lessons those scars taught in the first place.

replies(8): >>42138467 #>>42138490 #>>42138644 #>>42138759 #>>42139133 #>>42141484 #>>42142736 #>>42143702 #
1. dartos ◴[] No.42138759[source]
Imo real tech debt is when the separation between business logic and implementation details get blurry.

Rewrites tend to focus all in on implementation.