Quote Originally Posted by Binish
If a badly written code runs properly or atleast appears to do so superficially, it is do to sheer luck and the chances of surprises popping up out of nowhere is very high.

Further, it would be almost impossible to modify this code at a later stage for any improvements or it the requirements change - which do more often than not. When u have to enhance your program, you will find it increasingly going out of control as new unexpected errors will creep at the least expected time and place.

The time and efforts to tame such a source code would be much more when compared to that which can be invested in systematic software development process. So it would always be a safer bet to stick to the standards and processes as far as possible. you would be glad you did.

As far as the layman is concerned, he may not realise the importance of this or the difficulties that may arise due to lack of standards. I have mentioned only a few of the possible problems. It could be worse.

So his solution may apparently work, until some terrible flaws are unearthed. Then it becomes all the more difficult. That's why it is important to be systematic.
I think I understand what you're saying. Future enhancements and fixes are made more difficult when you don't stick to standards. So, it's not just a matter of doing it right because I was taught to do it right. It's a matter of doing it right so that future development and enhancement goes more smoothly.

Well, I do not wish my friend ill will. If he's lucky and it works error free, I'm happy for him. I've heard a phrase, "I'd rather be lucky than good." So maybe that's how he feels.

I appreciate your feedback.