←back to thread

873 points belter | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
debarshri ◴[] No.42953272[source]
Software development should also be seen from what stage the org is in.

Software development looks super different when the org is a startup vs when the market fit is established.

When you are a pre-PMF, you have to establish trust. You deliver fast, cut corners, make sure customer needs are met, value is generated. Nothing else matters.

When PMF is established. You have to de-risk everything. All your work is at stake. Then best practices has to be in place to makes things scalable, code quality matters because it is a proxy for enforcing standards.

I don't think Software can be seen in isolation. It has to be seen from thr orgs perspective.

replies(1): >>42953315 #
1. baq ◴[] No.42953315[source]
This. Engineers are hired to solve problems. Sometimes beautiful code and clean architecture are part of the requirements to solve the problem at hand. Sometimes… they aren’t.
replies(1): >>42953458 #
2. debarshri ◴[] No.42953458[source]
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I would argue you didn't use design patterns enough.

Beautiful code and clean architecture is a rabbit hole.

Code should be clean enough to communicate. As long as team understand and accepts the risk, it is good enough.

replies(1): >>42953727 #
3. baq ◴[] No.42953727[source]
I equate design patterns with language deficiencies, so not sure what to answer. I know 'beautiful' won't be part of the response, though.

Code is a liability, unless you're selling it. The less you have of it, the better off you are in the long run. That doesn't mean I don't agree that it should be clean, as an engineer. As a customer making a decision whether to buy a product or not, I couldn't care less. If you're hunting for product-market fit, you can do it with clean code, nothing is stopping you, except perhaps if there's enough runway to make paycheck.