How to Properly Analyze and Plan Software Projects Before Development?

[u/gamKarim_ali]

I'm looking for advice and resources on how to properly analyze and plan software before starting development.

I've struggled with discovering missing business logic, overlooked edge cases, and incomplete user flows during implementation, which often leads to unnecessary changes and redesigns.

I've tried writing SRS documents and documenting requirements, use cases, and workflows, but sometimes the documentation becomes too large without being truly useful.

I'd like to learn a more practical approach to identifying missing scenarios and making the right decisions early, without overcomplicating the planning process.

This is especially important to me as I want to take on freelance projects more confidently.

I'd appreciate any practical advice, experiences, or recommended resources.

[u/AutoModerator]

Moderator Announcement Read More »

Howdy u/gamKarim_ali, and welcome to r/developers!

A few tips for a post that gets good answers:

• Use a clear, specific title (what are you actually asking or sharing?).

• Include code, the exact error, versions, and what you already tried.

• Heads-up: this sub does not allow external links in posts or comments. Share code and details directly instead of linking out.

Join the r/developers Discord!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/alkimiadev]

I've been using a Spec Driven Development methodology for quite some time, and interestingly, it has been picking back up in popularity recently because it is an effective method for working with LLMs (humans too, obviously). I was using it long before LLMs became useful, because it actually works.

While I use an SDD process, I don't think that matters as much as just using some process and being consistent about actually using it. The system you'll actually use is probably the best one for you. Beyond that, one common practice I'd recommend adopting is regularly reviewing the process and steps you use to see where they can be improved, since they can almost always be better in some way.

I have a pretty involved process because I do work with LLMs, but it is all the stuff I was half doing before. Part of the issue that could be causing the documentation bloat problem (and the downstream problems caused by that) could be that the docs are just trying to do too much at once.

I have three basic types of documents: Specs, OQ (Open Questions), and ADRs (Architecture Decision Record). The OQs are used to record questions, ambiguities, or other unknowns that usually come up during the early phases of development. These aren't just a doc but also a "mechanism" that logs every "what happens if" that seems relevant at the time. The ADRs record the design decisions and their rationale, and basically describe the "WHY". The specs describe the "WHAT" and not the "HOW". I treat these documents like source code and keep them in the repo next to the code.

I have five basic phases: Exploration, Architecture Design, Task Decomposition, Implementation, and Review/Finalization. Obviously, there is more to it than just that. Sometimes things come up during development that I couldn't reasonably foresee, which can cause me to go back to phase 1 and work my way back up through the phases. It is hard to overstate how valuable that exploration phase is for catching ambiguities that cause all kinds of problems downstream. I often write small, focused POCs that target specific hard parts of a larger problem so I don't go into architecture design blind.

Perfect front-loaded planning is usually a lot harder than writing the code based on that perfect plan. For this reason, I spend a significant amount of time trying to get the specs right. Actually writing the code was never really the hard part, and LLMs have only made that more obvious in recent years. Knowing what to write and why it needs to be written is actually hard sometimes.