I’ve been cultivating this opinion that it’s the other way around. In any other domain, few people use crap tools to make something amazing, and I think it comes down to what you surround yourself with informs what you make.
We need better tools if we want better things.
Back in the late 90's I worked on a system that shipped on 4 different chip architectures, 4 different (unix-based) operating systems, dealt with different endianness and was more reliable and easier to understand. And it was more responsive to users with 1990's hardware than stuff is today. :shrug:
The bad things are still around in your infra even if you manage to never see them because you only see the "dozens lines of code" at the front.
Someone who really buys that "dozens lines of code" will definitely has no idea what kind of complexity it was about.
Oh sure. Can you try to set up ANY CI pipelines to make it more or less working, don't worry about "pipelines that build and test on multiple target platforms" and get back to share with us your experiences?
What exactly do you want to hear? Not op, but I’ve been doing it for some time.
How much code did you write to get it barely working all by yourself? Or you were just working on top of someone else's work? I did it a couple of times, it was never something like "dozens lines of code".
No, not really. Nowadays things are way way better than how they were a decade ago. Nowadays you can get pipelines that build and test on multiple target platforms with a dozen or so lines of code, and things run so well that they became reliable infrastructure integrated with your prod system.
Back then you had none of this, and had to pay the salary for a "build engineer" who worked like a wizard stirring a cauldron just to get a single production build out of the door.