> it's not they were lazy but they had intent to distill wisdom to save time.
Yes – I was referring to lazy in the sense of the apocryphal quote from Bill Gates:
“I choose a lazy person to do a hard job, because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it.”
> Only after going through a fundamentals-first approach do you not end up with one kind of spaghetti, but you end up with another kind because it's fundamentally engineered towards producing spaghetti code unless you constantly fight the inertia of spaghettification.
I’ve been guilty of this. Thinking that a given abstraction is unnecessary and overly-complicated, building my own minimal abstraction for my use case, and then slowly creating spaghetti as I account for more and more edge cases.
Yes – I was referring to lazy in the sense of the apocryphal quote from Bill Gates:
“I choose a lazy person to do a hard job, because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it.”
> Only after going through a fundamentals-first approach do you not end up with one kind of spaghetti, but you end up with another kind because it's fundamentally engineered towards producing spaghetti code unless you constantly fight the inertia of spaghettification.
I’ve been guilty of this. Thinking that a given abstraction is unnecessary and overly-complicated, building my own minimal abstraction for my use case, and then slowly creating spaghetti as I account for more and more edge cases.