Rewriting software is a topic that sparks endless debates among engineers. The first reaction when joining an existing project is often: “This is a mess, let’s start fresh”. It’s tempting to imagine a perfect, clean system - elegant architecture, fewer compromises, faster development.
Sometimes a rewrite is justified. But what’s often overlooked are the small fixes, edge case patches, and tweaks accumulated over time. That “messy” system is often stable because of these hard-earned adjustments.
A rewrite might feel faster initially, but regaining that stability - rediscovering subtle fixes, handling edge cases, and testing thoroughly - often takes longer than improving the existing code.
The key is balance. Rewrites aren’t inherently bad, but they come with hidden costs. Stabil…
Rewriting software is a topic that sparks endless debates among engineers. The first reaction when joining an existing project is often: “This is a mess, let’s start fresh”. It’s tempting to imagine a perfect, clean system - elegant architecture, fewer compromises, faster development.
Sometimes a rewrite is justified. But what’s often overlooked are the small fixes, edge case patches, and tweaks accumulated over time. That “messy” system is often stable because of these hard-earned adjustments.
A rewrite might feel faster initially, but regaining that stability - rediscovering subtle fixes, handling edge cases, and testing thoroughly - often takes longer than improving the existing code.
The key is balance. Rewrites aren’t inherently bad, but they come with hidden costs. Stability, accumulated fixes, and historical knowledge are valuable, and any rewrite should account for them before lighting the match.
Don’t chase perfection blindly - sometimes improving what works is smarter than starting over.
Happy coding!