If it's harder to work with, it's harder to work with, it's not the end of the world. At least it exists, which it probably wouldn't have if developed with "camp 2" tendencies.
I think camp 2 would rather see one beautiful thing than ten useful things.
I optimise for "make it work", that's what the deal says.
If there's extra time, I might go to step two which is "make it pretty". Meaning that I go through the code and see that it's all good and proper if we need to add features later on.
Unashamedly, I would, but this is a false dilemma. We can have ten beautiful and useful things.
The thing that drives the camp 2 folk crazy is that often it would have taken no extra effort (or perhaps even less effort overall) to make a good version of the thing but the people who made thing simply couldn't be bothered.
The attitude you're describing here has led directly to our world being full of profoundly disappointing objects that proliferate because they meet a minimum bar of usefulness.
People don't like the minimum bar. They'll take it if it's the only thing on offer, but they like better things.
There is nothing I despise more than someone who doesn't care.
I remember reviewing code once, a C++ class that allocates new objects on the heap, but was lacking cleanup code to delete these objects.
"It doesn't matter if the memory leaks. Those methods rarely get called."
And he was right, during the lifetime of the application it would've likely leaked only kilobytes worth of memory. But it would've taken very little effort to write cleanup code.
I believe those that take no pride in their work will never amount for anything more than mediocrity.
> I think camp 2 would rather see one beautiful thing than ten useful things.
Both beautiful and useful are subjective (imo). Steve job's adding calligraphy to computer fonts could've considered a thing of beauty which derived from his personal relation to calligraphy, but it also is an really useful thing.
It's my personal opinion that some of the most valuable innovations are both useful and beautiful (elegant).
Of course, there are rough hacks sometimes but those are beautiful in their own way as well. Once again, both beauty and usefulness is subjective.
(If you measure Usefulness with the profit earned within a purely capitalistic lens, what happens is that you might do layoffs and you might degrade customer service to get to that measure, which ultimately reduces the usefulness. profit is a very lousy measure of usefulness in my opinion. We all need profit though but doing solely everything for profit also feels a bit greedy to me.)
Ah yes, if you aren't shitting code out the door as fast as possible, you're probably not shipping anything at all.
Yeah it just takes longer and makes you miserable in the process. No biggie!
