Hypothesis:
Coding is a free market enterprise. Wild-west coding or coding anarchy is more profitable and more likely to encourage progress than following any coding methodology. (I.e. waterfall, agile, extreme, pair coding, etc.)
I. This is shown by the source code of the most successful companies. The only commonality they share is that their most popular product feature was born of a non-methodological hack. It is only after the initial phase of success that a company brings order to the code.
II. The code that brings a company its first success is un-readable and un-maintainble.
III. Coding profitably is a result of breaking the rules and letting the market rather than the development process decide. Web analytics is vital.
IV. The consistency condition that demands coders code according to a design pattern or for the sake of maintainability is unreasonable because it either preserves an unprofitable coding methodology or obscures money making logic in the guise of readable code.
V. There is no coding method or technology however absurd or ancient that cannot be profitable. (My Space running on Cold Fusion w/SQL Servers as a back end.)
VI. There exists no code base that is capable of generating profit that is 100% in harmony with a given coding methodology. Many code bases are constituted by older technologies and older ways of making money; therefore a clash between methodologies is a sign of being wise and sensitive to changing markets.
One reply on “The Code of Successful Websites”
Haha, I love the comparison to the wild west. It’s very true that the biggest growth and most notable functionality are usually a product of flimsy code. But how do you balance the sloppy requirements on early development with the inevitable need for solid maintainable code as the product grows in scale and in function?
Also, is it not possible that a clash of methodologies might also be a sign of a floundering project making desperate changes in management?