I like the term "design damage" in regards to programming. Reminds me of my father telling me to take care of my things, when I was a child.
It is much easier to clean up and order things if we do it continuously, because the implied "damage" is much weaker this way. If we think of programs as tools that need care, we might build things that have more longevity. It is also more fun to work with a clean and well ordered system of tools than with something that is messy and chaotic.
Re:Musings on Tech Debt (2020)
by foohoo_blue on Sunday July 04, 2021 @08:55AM
(#27729278)
"If it is ‘debt’ you actually plan to pay it."
Exactly that, and it should be a decision to accrue it.
Sometimes I’ve put off writing the unit test (in an area of the code that has been around for months or years w/ little or no testing.) and made a bug fix or small feature. I had a plan to revisit it when coming back to the same zone and did.
I’ll justify it like this. If a system is not well-modularized for testing and there isn’t a precedent for mocking or similar methods in that area, rushing to write tests can lead to test-induced design damage.
If I walk away from the code a bit somehow it gets reprocessed in my mind and in the meantime I read up on my tools and understand other parts of the system often I come back and find the tests are quick to write and not damaging.
That is, tests written hastily might not be a net positive.