> The most foolproof way to avoid regressions is to leave the code alone.
The most foolproof way to avoid car accidents is to avoid ever being around a car.
Surely that's not the only objective, right?
The most foolproof way to avoid car accidents is to avoid ever being around a car.
Surely that's not the only objective, right?
Some people tinker with adding mods and things to their cars which increase the probability of the problem.
If that's what you and the OP are saying, then you're conflating the codebase with the end product (program). Yes, the end user (at least in an ideal world) shouldn't need to modify the end product. That wasn't ever disputed, though.
The point (if I have to use your car-modding analogy instead) is the manufacturer's engineering team very much does need to be able to evolve the design (read: source code) for future versions of the car.
Would you rather fly on a plane that has been used daily for the same flight for the past 10 years? Or fly on a plane that’s either never flown, just got out of the shop, or hasn’t been flown in years?
But you also can't go and redesign the entire thing.