Understanding the Perspective of World-Class Coders: Why Many See Most Code as Lousy and Broken

As an experienced software developer in my little part of the big world, I consider myself somewhat of an expert. In my personal opinion, most software is hastily thrown together under pressure to meet tight deadlines and budgets. Often, there is no time to write elegant code. It takes years to learn the right way, but with no higher standards to guide you, there is no definitive wrong way to code. However, this does not mean we shouldn't strive for better.

The Struggle for Elegant Code

Every day, I look back at my own code from just a few years ago and find it wanting. Even when the code is working, functionality being the only true criterion of software development, it still feels subpar. This sentiment is echoed by world-class coders of the world. They, too, look over their past work and wonder how they managed to think that was good enough. As time goes on, as we learn new techniques and best practices evolve, even the best code they once wrote seems lousy. The old adage of “you can always do better” holds true.

The Entropy of Coding

The notion of code becoming lousy by entropy is an interesting concept. You write some reasonable code, but as requirements change, the next developer maintains the product by updating conditions to match the new ones. However, these updates often introduce unreachable conditions, confusion, and maintenance burdens. Without a formal Software Quality Assurance (SQA) process, these changes can be left in the codebase. The next maintainer, unaware of these archaic conditions, struggles to understand the code and adds their fixes, creating a messy situation. This cycle, where each developer attempts to meet deadlines, often leads to lousy code. It's the inherently flawed process of maintenance that can turn otherwise good code into a maintenance nightmare.

The Challenge of Defining 'Broken' Code

The term 'broken' in the context of code can be ambiguous. If the code doesn't work properly, it clearly fails the testing phase. However, often the term 'broken' is used to describe code that is poorly abstracted or tightly coupled. In other words, it's code that is not cleanly designed and hard to maintain.

A Critique of 'Most' Code

When world-class coders say that “most” code is lousy or broken, they aren't necessarily suggesting that most functional software is bad. Many software applications work just fine. On the other hand, if 'most' code is broken because of poor design and implementation, then we have to conclude that it's an unwinnable battle. It's important to recognize that functional software can exist even with less-than-ideal practices.

Striving for Better Practices

Regardless, the goal of all coders, including world-class coders, is to constantly improve. Best practices, coding standards, and a commitment to writing clean, maintainable code are the cornerstones of this pursuit. Embracing learning and staying updated with evolving standards is crucial. If we acknowledge that code can always be better and strive for that, we'll see a marked improvement in the quality of software over time. The journey to better code is a continuous one, and each programmer's commitment to it is a key factor in the development of high-quality software.