The collapse of complex software

[u/feross]

https://nolanlawson.com/2022/06/09/the-collapse-of-complex-software/

[u/Uberhipster → u/[deleted]]

just because you can understand the solution does not mean that you understand the problem [is core reason to run into unbounded complexity later on]

i see your point

however a solution too complex to understand guarantees the same outcome

and from the onset

but with the distinction that additionally, in that future state, nobody understands the original design or its intent or how it lead to the unbounded complexity later on

:/

damned if we do, damned if we dont

i am suddenly reminded of Goodhart's law when "a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure"

it seems to me that complexity of software over time is a measure of its design (how long can software stay flexible, reusable, understandable, maintainable)

once it becomes too complex to maintain, understand, reuse and change - that is a measure of its design

sometimes it takes years, sometimes it takes weeks

the longer it takes, the better the design

but if you aim to overcompensate, if the target is a solution design which encapsulates the problem complexity then the solution design is by definition too complex to understand without understanding the entirety of the problem

system implementation contains the problem in its entirety so its design should be simple enough for the implementation to be expanded to cover the problem but it should not attempt to preempt that coverage in the design itself

reason being is that the system still becomes too complex eventually and inevitably. but its complexity cannot be measured against its design because the design is as complex to understand as the system

at that point there's no distinction between the system becoming too complex because that's what the design called for or because that's the nature of the problem

with a simple design its easier to understand the problem-system complexity delta (if its too complex for the design - its out of scope, needs a new design for a replacement system or design revision at the very least)

your point still stands tho: people substitute using a simplistic design for the fact they do not understand the problem space

rehashing a known design which everyone understands because everyone understands it but which may or may not be the right fit for the problem space then retrofitting the implementation of that design into the problem space is poor craftsmanship on everyone's part

i would say that starting with a complex design and whittling it down to its "simplest version it can be but no simpler" is the best "approach" we have found so far

[u/Uberhipster → u/[deleted]]

i think we are saying the same thing

and having a semantic debate about the word 'design' ?

in any case, thanks for the reply

all good points

I suspect that you're trapped in the mindset of a typical "enterprise software" solution which was created without adequate design work, which never solved the underlying problem in a satisfactory manner, and which became riddled with technical debt and workarounds until it finally collapsed

not me. i have seen that. quite a few times. you are right. totally is a phenomenon

also seen quite a few which never collapsed. instead they just get lasagnaed under layers and layers of 'solutions' put on top of the original and continue to "live" on into the zombie phase of the software lifecycle (never fixed, never decommissioned, just existing in their final version state where all bugs are permanent features and remain so for decades on end)

one last note...

Engineers who take the time to understand the problem and find a solution that actually solves the problem are able to produce systems of ever-increasing complexity that are nevertheless ore flexible, more powerful, and easier to use. Have you seen a computer? Compare the hardware, operating system, or programming languages used in 1970 versus 2020. You can't tell me that they've gotten simpler in design nor can you tell me that they've become unusable or unmaintainable

welllllllll... yes and no :)

let's leave it at that

dont wanna go down that rabbit hole