Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Steve W
I am convinced that rewriting software is now bad and copy and paste is good (tongue in cheek). Now the fact that I am a builder I can use the same reasoning for using a new drive base that our students have spent all summer and fall fixing and building. Why should we have to rebuild an already good working unit? I would even say that because the students built it that it has more validity than coping someone else's software.
|
That's not a valid analogy. The rule states that you can not reuse existing hardware or software, but you can reuse the design. This is a flawed system because the manufacturing costs of the two artifacts are different. Once you design a part, the cost to manufacture it, both in time and money, is roughly the same from that point forward. You may be able to make it a slightly faster or slightly cheaper, but the up-front investment has already been made. Writing software from scratch is completely different. No matter how good your design or algorithm is, reproducing a complex piece of code does not scale the way a mechanical component does.
[EDIT]
I want to clarify my position. I think this is a bad rule and it does not serve the program. However, it is a rule, and cannot be ignored. When you choose to participate in ANY activity you agree to follow the rules, whether you like them or not. This is especially important when the rules are not enforceable.
[/EDIT]