Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 378 posts

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#101

Post by dceddia »

StreamBright wrote: post #86

Well, I think there are 6 points to answer here: >> 0, Are we over complicating software development? Yes, in many cases we are over complicating software development. I think a large part of OOP too complex to produce reliable services easily, still possible though. Simplicity is not as popular among developers as it should be. I often run into complex code that can be replaced by 10x smaller code base that is much…

Re: #2, what are some such services?

AWS seems to be the go-to standard but it's amazingly complicated.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#102

Post by koolba »

> 1) Choose languages that developers are familiar with, not the best tool for the job

The language that you're familiar with generally is the best tool for the job. Most software work can be equally done well (or at least greater than acceptably well) in a number of languages. Not having to learn a new one (or a new framework) is a plus.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#103

Post by melvinmt »

blub wrote: post #95
reacharavindh wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, everyone in there knows that scrum meetings should be short, but somehow those meetings take long, because everyone thinks their questions needs answers and their dependabcies definitely must be resolved.. so, an hour it goes.

This is really bad and a major failure on the part of the scrum master. The point of this meeting is to help the team sync on what they are doing and what they plan to do. It should take 10m at most . Any issues (blockers, dependencies, etc) should be taken to separate ad-hoc discussions to let the team get back to work.

If there is no room for syncing up and every issue is to be taken offline, one should question if it makes sense the stand ups should be kept in sync. In my team we do standups asynchronously over Slack, it's a great and non obtrusive way of updating each other and we achieve the same thing.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#104

Post by throwawayish »

BjoernKW wrote: post #28

No, it's not just you and yes, we often do overcomplicate software development. It's been that way long before agile methodology or microservices though. Complexity-for-the-sake-of-complexity EverthingHasToBeAnAbstractClass frameworks have been plaguing the software development business since at least the 1990s and I'm sure there are similar stories from the 80s and 70s. It's hard to find a one-size-fits-all easy met…

It's interesting to work alone on a big-ish project with no one telling you what to do and not having to explain anything to anyone. It easily feels ten-times more productive (in terms of accomplishment), but then again it won't have a business case and one doesn't get paid, either.

I think I'm least productive in open source (again, in terms of felt accomplishment), because if one isn't the sole maintainer (like above), then it's a pretty safe bet that few changes take less than a certain baseline (eg. 1 hour) -- someone always has a nitpick, CI always takes it's sweet time, oh, did we discuss yet in which branches we wanna merge this? Ah, please avoid puns in documentation and comments. Do we want this? Can you write this differently, like ...? Did you manually test this or that scenario ...?

(Now this also has advantages in terms of stability, quality and consistency -- but it's also obviously far, far less efficient)

On the clock it's more like "Meh, change that and that, otherwise it's good, so merge it after these changes and tell ops to put it in prod"

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#105

Post by cookiecaper »

PaulHoule wrote: post #9

Continuous integration is a good thing. Back in the bad old days you'd have three people working on parts of the system for 6 months and plan to snap them together in 2 weeks and it would take more like another 6 months. Agile methods are also useful. If you can't plan 2 weeks of work you can probably not plan 6 months. When agile methods harden into branded processes and where there is no consensus on the ground rul…

"Agile methods" as a term has zero meaning at this point. Talk about the specific things you do to make things work well instead of lumping them under the heading "agile".

The issue of people refusing to coordinate and working independently on two useless things for months at a time is an issue that transcends any popular software terminology. The role of a good manager is to see that units A and B are not in sync and resolve that. That's true in all disciplines. You can't attribute this to "agile" just because you meet every 2 weeks.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#106

Post by beat »

1. What problem are you optimizing for? "The job" encompasses code, but it also encompasses staffing. It's a lot easier to hire Java developers than Scala developers. In a leadership role, your responsibility isn't just the day-to-day code - it's the whole project.

2. Microservices vs monoliths is a see-saw. You build a monolith, find it's a brittle, incomprehensible hairball, and you break out microservices. You build microservices, find that operational headaches are killing you, and start consolidating them into monoliths. Which kneecap do you want the bullet in?

3. Fix what breaks.

4. Continuous integration is vital. But it needs to be evolved along with the system. There's this thing I say... "Have computers do what computers do well, have humans do what humans do well". Handling complex and repeatable behavior (i.e. builds and test suites) should absolutely be automated as much as possible. Think continuous integration sucks? Try handing it off to humans for a while! You'll learn whole new levels of pain.

5. All process is about (or should be about) specific, discrete communications issues.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#107

Post by WalterSear »

melvinmt wrote: post #103
blub wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really bad and a major failure on the part of the scrum master. The point of this meeting is to help the team sync on what they are doing and what they plan to do. It should take 10m at most . Any issues (blockers, dependencies, etc) should be taken to separate ad-hoc discussions to let the team get back to work.

If there is no room for syncing up and every issue is to be taken offline, one should question if it makes sense the stand ups should be kept in sync. In my team we do standups asynchronously over Slack, it's a great and non obtrusive way of updating each other and we achieve the same thing.

It's not the same.

The standup performs an important social function of making everyone involved in the work of the team. People have to face each other, feel accountable to, and feel supported by the group.

And of course there's no room for synching up: The morning standup is meant to facilitate those synch-up meetings, synch-ups that don't have to involve everyone.

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#109

Post by [deleted] »

reacharavindh wrote: post #31
PaulHoule wrote: post #9

Continuous integration is a good thing. Back in the bad old days you'd have three people working on parts of the system for 6 months and plan to snap them together in 2 weeks and it would take more like another 6 months. Agile methods are also useful. If you can't plan 2 weeks of work you can probably not plan 6 months. When agile methods harden into branded processes and where there is no consensus on the ground rul…

> Agile methods are also useful. If you can't plan 2 weeks of work you can probably not plan 6 months. Hmmm. I was just thinking the opposite yesterday. I'm a performance engineer working closely with two teams. One doing Agile and the other basing on wikis and Adhoc in-person whiteboard discussions. I find the non agile team more productive, efficient and dare I say happy. The Agile based team makes me sit in on the…

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Are we overcomplicating software development?

#110

Post by AnimalMuppet »

iainmerrick wrote: post #62
dcminter wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming this is scrum or something similar then if "[the standup] just drags for an hour almost every day" then they're not really doing it right. I've been in well run Agile teams - and they're wonderful. I've been in badly run "Agile" teams and they're soul destroying. Either way agile is not the problem (or, I dare say, the solution).

One thing I've observed in (badly-run, I think) Agile teams is big standup meetings, where if anyone starts a discussion or even asks a question (rather than just reporting status) somebody immediately says "offline!" -- i.e., have that discussion after the meeting. I can see that the motivation is to avoid wasting the whole team's time on a discussion that only needs two or three people; but suppressing discussion c…

I've been in a situation where we did agile with 30 people. Standup took 10-15 minutes.
Post reply on HN