> This is complete lack of experience on the authors part
Actually I'm going to turn the accusation back on yourself: if you think reasoning about a system's entire graph of behaviours from runtime traces is trivial, I don't believe you've worked on a truly complex system
The range of what a program can do is much larger than what a program does do in your two week Datadog aggregation window
You can't capture the full range of behaviours and edge cases unless you are willing to ingest billions of events without lossiness
Metrics have limitations of cardinality. Logs need to be reduced or else you are in archive rehydration hell
There will be code paths that have never been triggered that you still need to reason about as part of analysing a system, eg in threat modelling
> I get why you think I might not have worked on large systems
I didn't, necessarily. But it looked like an excessively strong claim, combined with a challenge to the author's competence. I wanted to call that out.
I don’t know where you learned engineering but where I work, we test our code. There are no “dark” paths.
98% code coverage over 50+ microservices.
Static analysis doesn't go away. Metrics just covers the gap of "is this used by external callers", and nothing more than that. You need that to identify dead routes in a monolith anyway.
If you like static analysis, you should be able to spin up new code in a language more amenable to it than the incumbent code. Not doable in a monolith.