Hacker News Reader

There is a common theme of "the end result is all that matters" but there are pretty big long term repercussions of design and implementation choices. For side projects and POC experiments this feels like the right approach but the risk flip flops for large scale projects that have the more risk associated with them. Maybe it is just through testing and validation checks?

View on HN

I posit that most software isn't large scale projects.

Certainly mine isn't. But I've still generated hundreds of thousands of lines of code.

But no one will ever read them. And solid engineering defines the interfaces between them. So we specify the ins and outs and let the rest take its course.

> there are pretty big long term repercussions of design and implementation choices

At least this part I am still specifying. It doesn't get to choose its own technologies. It generally includes the architecture in the plan that I review.

Me too. I specify everything like that. Which database to use, which style of database to use, etc. the sort of thing a Team Leader would pick (after consulting the team, of course).

I've been coding since the 8-bit days.

With the added benefit I can specify, "let's try using this stack this time." I haven't got to spend two months learning it to get to MVP.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com