I guess I wanted to say that no tool/technology can prevent people from creating chaos (or make up for bad/non-existant processes). People need to do that. Of course, systematic people use tools as well. But you can't expect to buy or mandate a tool/technology and expect your system to then automatically have these qualities.
Re:Composition Shouldn't be this Hard
by buggymcbugfix on Friday April 24, 2026 @01:39PM
(#47893428)
That is true! The system I mentioned above, which I had to refactor, was written in the worst Haskell that I've ever seen and nobody at the company dared touch it with a 10-foot pole.
> Not sure if tools and technologies can solve accidental complexity.
... and then say
> For me, consistent systematic naming and prefixes/suffixes to make names unique are a hint that a person is thinking about this or has experience with maintaining old systems. This has a huge effect on how well you can search, analyze, find usages, understand, replace, change.
I have battle scars from refactoring legacy systems where my predecessors did _not_ consistently or uniquely name things and I would not have seen it through without my sidekick, the type checker!