Worse is better?

[Chris Williams via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 10 October 2014 at 22:25:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> So it's not that we don't care about simplicity anymore. We 
> care about what is simple for the programmer to get complex 
> work done quickly and accurately. I like to think of D as a 
> fully equipped machine shop, where the programmer doesn't have 
> to make do with inadequate (but simple) tools. As professional 
> programmers, isn't that what we really care about?

Agreed. Overall, I'd say that there's a third way beyond "better" 
or "worse", which is "non-whollistic better".

I always start any new task not by designing the whole 
application nor by start to hack together parts as I need them. 
Instead, I identify "tools" - parts of the application that I 
know will exist, but could be used in any variety of applications 
- and build nicely designed, generic libraries for those. With a 
set of "better" libraries the remaining code that links them 
together is fairly small, so it's easy to shuffle things around 
or build out new functionality.