Re:Why Software Jewels Are Rare (1996) [pdf]
by erikerikson on Sunday April 04, 2021 @12:25PM
(#26690759)
The original arrogance is believing that you know which problem is most valuable to solve. Yes, the constant cycle is annoying but framework producers are under the same incentives as those delivering applications. There's only so much runway and at the end of the day you need something useful if anyone will adopt in slightly more useful than switching cost if you want anyone to change to your framework from another. From each attempt we gain insight and perspective that we can use to feed in to a slightly better implementation on the next tool or implementation.
Re:Why Software Jewels Are Rare (1996) [pdf]
by mro_name on Sunday April 04, 2021 @04:50AM
(#26687883)
Intesting - that's my impression as an outsider (mobile, not web).
> Everybody reinvents. Everybody abandons.
There's that saying about haute couture - "out of fashion" is just highly avantgarde.
That's why I build CGIs. They as up-to-date today as they were 15 years ago.
So many frameworks, so many concepts repeating their form every 3-5 years...and only with pure luck you pick the one framework that will be there for the next 2 years to come.
Nobody refactors. Everybody reinvents. Everybody abandons. It's an endless cycle of catching your own tail.
If you read a software engineering book about patterns and architectures you'll quickly realize how many framworks reused a concept that is 30 years existing already, yet selling themselves as the hot new cool kid on the block.
I don't understand why lately architecting software doesn't result in refactoring anymore. I think that only through refactoring you can really understand and learn from your own mistakes.