[OT] Why software ends up complex

[Robert M. Münch]

On 16 Dec 2020 at 11:59:37 CET, "claptrap" <clap at trap.com> wrote:

> I think he's making a distinction between complexity that is 
> inherent to the problem and unnecessary complexity due to a poor 
> solution.
> 
> Unnecessary complexity is mostly down to lack of orthogonality I 
> think. If you have a bunch of small independent parts its' much 
> easier to reason about how the code you're looking at will 
> behave. But if the parts change how they behave based on the 
> context, or have exceptions or corner cases, then you have to 
> hold a lot more in your head at one time to understand whats 
> going on.
> 
> I think the point is complexity is less about how much stuff you 
> have, and more about how it all interacts.

Yes, thanks for the extended explanation.

The other dimension is complication: For a necessary complexity you can come
up with a smart & simple solution or with a complicated one. 

And if you now have non-value complexity (many things to handle) due to poor
design, combined with a complicated implementation due to a poor solution, you
are doomed.

-- 
Robert M. Münch
http://www.saphirion.com
smarter | better | faster