Is Worse Better?
December 1, 2006
Yes, of-course! Worse is always better than worst!
But seriously:
The worse is better series of essays emphasize an important truth about software architecture and software development processes. The truth is that there is no silver bullet; there is no absolute best architecture or absolute best process. Richard Gabriel (the author of the essays) himself was undecided about whether the “Worse is Better” approach to software development was better than “The Right Thing” approach. He convincingly argues for and against both the approaches multiple times! So my conclusion from the series is that the best architecture and best process are different for software projects with different circumstances and requirements.
This brings us to the question that Prof Johnson put forth in class: “Does this mean that we should not study/research software architecture?”. I think that this provides a greater reason for studying/researching software architecture and software processes. Not only do we need to find better processes and architectures, we also need to determine the circumstances under which they will be better. This seems obvious, but sometimes when people develop a loyalty for a certain architecture or process, they forget that the architecture or process is only good for some circumstances.
Great post. I’d add that technology evolution changes the constraints we have to architect within which means that architecture has to evolve. Loyalty to a specific architecture makes little sense at a given point in time and even less over time.
Great Post -> Thank you Dan.
You make an excellent point about techology evolution and time. They are definitely vital variables that affect the suitability of architectures.