On 3 June 2010 11:49, pepe <p...@betterrpg.com> wrote: > if you ask a boss or customer what is that > they prefer, pretty vs. working code, I can tell you that not 100 but > 200% of them will choose working. ;)
Erroneous. You're not giving them all the information needed to make their choice. Sure, quick and dirty can have its place; but by using it you're introducing Technical Debt [1], which in the long run can cost them an awful lot more than had the code been written in a well-designed fashion in the first place. It's not a cut 'n dried choice between pretty and working (and trust me, I've had to wade through ugly and broken enough times)... it's much more complicated than that, and needs to be presented to decision makers as such. The only way I use if people want a simple choice is to say there are three options: * quickly produced * well written * cheap price ... then give them an option to pick which two (and they can *only* have two) of the three they want. This makes it clear, that if they choose Quick and Cheap, they will not be getting Good. Returning to the technical debt argument; I've seen this in practice many times. It's certainly frustrating when boss/customer ignores sense and goes for short-term gain... but there is always the option of working for other bosses/customers :-) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_debt -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-t...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
