Hacker News Reader

Have to agree on Code Complete. The first edition was a load of waterfall bollocks and I couldn't believe anyone wrote code like that. It actively put me off a "proper" programming career. The second edition, apparently, reduced that shite, but by that point I wondered "if the author is just reproducing dogma, why bother?"

View on HN

Code Complete was published in 1993, so I think it can be forgiven its emphasis on waterfall development. It back its advice by citing real studies of software project, though the projects were from the 1960/70s at big companies like IBM.

Like I said, its a book about dogma and cherry-picked studies. The dogma and studies were wrong. So if you want books about broken dogma and studies, read Code Complete.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com