Оффлайн
- Регистрация
- 1 Мар 2015
- Сообщения
- 1,481
- Баллы
- 155
Ah, the famous "Don't Repeat Yourself" (DRY) principle—the holy grail for developers everywhere. It's as if coding gurus climbed a mountain, meditated for years, and descended with this one universal truth carved in a silicon tablet: Never, ever duplicate code. But hold your keyboards, folks. Let's chat about DRY, startups, and that sneaky little devil called entropy.
First, what is DRY exactly? It’s pretty simple—"Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous representation within a system." Sounds awesome, right? Less duplication, fewer bugs, cleaner codebases, and happier coders. Who wouldn't want that? But startups are different beasts. They're scrappy, hungry, and chaotic by design. Things change faster than JavaScript frameworks (seriously, slow down). So, can startups afford to be super religious about DRY? Let’s dive in.
DRY: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (and a Dash of Entropy)
In the early days of your startup, your product isn't just evolving—it's mutating like a weird, beautiful alien from a sci-fi movie. You write some nifty abstraction, feeling like the smartest coder in the universe, then boom—next sprint, the requirements shift, your abstraction is obsolete, and you've got a spaghetti mess.
The truth is, DRY has a hidden cost, and it’s called entropy—the tendency for systems to move towards chaos over time. Ironically, when you're religiously DRY at the start, you might unintentionally accelerate entropy later. Why? Because the moment your beautifully abstracted component doesn't quite fit the next use case, you're stuck refactoring or (shudder) copying the abstraction and tweaking it slightly, violating DRY anyway.
The Debt Connection: Is DRY a Debt Prevention Tool?
You might argue, "Hey, isn’t DRY about avoiding tech debt?" Well, sort of. DRY reduces duplication and, theoretically, tech debt. But here's the kicker: startups notoriously avoid repaying their tech debt, hoping future rounds of funding will magically make the debts disappear. Spoiler alert: They don’t.
The real problem isn't necessarily DRY itself, but the unwillingness (or inability) to pay down debt regularly. DRY without debt management is like brushing your teeth religiously but never flossing. Sure, superficially everything looks good, but beneath the surface, the decay festers.
If your startup actually pays its tech debts—firstly, congrats, you're rare!—then DRY becomes genuinely beneficial. It can increase speed, improve readability, and make your developers feel less like they're trapped in Groundhog Day fixing the same bugs repeatedly.
So, What's the Right Level of Abstraction?
Now, you might be wondering, "Okay, genius, if DRY isn't always great for startups, what is?" Fair question. The magic is in balancing abstraction. Too much abstraction early on is like planning a detailed itinerary for a spontaneous weekend. Sure, you've got it all mapped out, but inevitably plans change, and you've wasted precious hours.
For early-stage startups, aim for what I call "damp" code—"Don’t Abstract More Prematurely." (
, I just invented that, thank you.) Damp means it's slightly repetitive, slightly messy, but flexible. Allow yourself to duplicate a bit until patterns become clear. Once you see that pattern repeating more than a couple of times, abstract away, baby!
Think about abstraction like seasoning: sprinkle lightly at first, taste often, and only add more when you're sure it improves the dish.
Startup Pragmatism: Embracing Imperfection
Startups must embrace a bit of code chaos. DRY is beautiful in theory, but startups thrive on adaptability, iteration, and controlled chaos—especially in early stages. By obsessively enforcing DRY, you risk slowing down the very speed that makes startups competitive.
If you focus instead on maintaining a clear and flexible architecture and regularly tackle technical debt, you'll find a sweet spot. Your goal shouldn't be absolute perfection—it should be strategic imperfection. Keep entropy in check without strangling your agility.
The Verdict: To DRY or Not to DRY?
DRY isn't inherently bad or good—it’s about timing and discipline. DRY works beautifully when combined with consistent tech debt management. It’s not DRY that hurts startups, but blind adherence without context or follow-through.
Early-stage startups should cautiously flirt with DRY, not marry it immediately. Duplicate when necessary, abstract only when the benefits outweigh the costs, and always, always revisit and refactor as you grow.
Remember, startups succeed by balancing speed, pragmatism, and adaptability—not by winning code beauty contests. I've learnt this the hard way when I over-architected and over abstracted my code which is a mistake often done by less senior engineer. Maybe I was trying to prove something to myself. At my latest startup, , I've gone the complete opposite way and I have duplicated code intentionally. Since I've had been able to prioritise tech debt reasonably, this has not been an issue so far. However I'll see whether I'll revise this belief as the team grows.
First, what is DRY exactly? It’s pretty simple—"Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous representation within a system." Sounds awesome, right? Less duplication, fewer bugs, cleaner codebases, and happier coders. Who wouldn't want that? But startups are different beasts. They're scrappy, hungry, and chaotic by design. Things change faster than JavaScript frameworks (seriously, slow down). So, can startups afford to be super religious about DRY? Let’s dive in.
DRY: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (and a Dash of Entropy)
In the early days of your startup, your product isn't just evolving—it's mutating like a weird, beautiful alien from a sci-fi movie. You write some nifty abstraction, feeling like the smartest coder in the universe, then boom—next sprint, the requirements shift, your abstraction is obsolete, and you've got a spaghetti mess.
The truth is, DRY has a hidden cost, and it’s called entropy—the tendency for systems to move towards chaos over time. Ironically, when you're religiously DRY at the start, you might unintentionally accelerate entropy later. Why? Because the moment your beautifully abstracted component doesn't quite fit the next use case, you're stuck refactoring or (shudder) copying the abstraction and tweaking it slightly, violating DRY anyway.
The Debt Connection: Is DRY a Debt Prevention Tool?
You might argue, "Hey, isn’t DRY about avoiding tech debt?" Well, sort of. DRY reduces duplication and, theoretically, tech debt. But here's the kicker: startups notoriously avoid repaying their tech debt, hoping future rounds of funding will magically make the debts disappear. Spoiler alert: They don’t.
The real problem isn't necessarily DRY itself, but the unwillingness (or inability) to pay down debt regularly. DRY without debt management is like brushing your teeth religiously but never flossing. Sure, superficially everything looks good, but beneath the surface, the decay festers.
If your startup actually pays its tech debts—firstly, congrats, you're rare!—then DRY becomes genuinely beneficial. It can increase speed, improve readability, and make your developers feel less like they're trapped in Groundhog Day fixing the same bugs repeatedly.
So, What's the Right Level of Abstraction?
Now, you might be wondering, "Okay, genius, if DRY isn't always great for startups, what is?" Fair question. The magic is in balancing abstraction. Too much abstraction early on is like planning a detailed itinerary for a spontaneous weekend. Sure, you've got it all mapped out, but inevitably plans change, and you've wasted precious hours.
For early-stage startups, aim for what I call "damp" code—"Don’t Abstract More Prematurely." (
, I just invented that, thank you.) Damp means it's slightly repetitive, slightly messy, but flexible. Allow yourself to duplicate a bit until patterns become clear. Once you see that pattern repeating more than a couple of times, abstract away, baby!Think about abstraction like seasoning: sprinkle lightly at first, taste often, and only add more when you're sure it improves the dish.
Startup Pragmatism: Embracing Imperfection
Startups must embrace a bit of code chaos. DRY is beautiful in theory, but startups thrive on adaptability, iteration, and controlled chaos—especially in early stages. By obsessively enforcing DRY, you risk slowing down the very speed that makes startups competitive.
If you focus instead on maintaining a clear and flexible architecture and regularly tackle technical debt, you'll find a sweet spot. Your goal shouldn't be absolute perfection—it should be strategic imperfection. Keep entropy in check without strangling your agility.
The Verdict: To DRY or Not to DRY?
DRY isn't inherently bad or good—it’s about timing and discipline. DRY works beautifully when combined with consistent tech debt management. It’s not DRY that hurts startups, but blind adherence without context or follow-through.
Early-stage startups should cautiously flirt with DRY, not marry it immediately. Duplicate when necessary, abstract only when the benefits outweigh the costs, and always, always revisit and refactor as you grow.
Remember, startups succeed by balancing speed, pragmatism, and adaptability—not by winning code beauty contests. I've learnt this the hard way when I over-architected and over abstracted my code which is a mistake often done by less senior engineer. Maybe I was trying to prove something to myself. At my latest startup, , I've gone the complete opposite way and I have duplicated code intentionally. Since I've had been able to prioritise tech debt reasonably, this has not been an issue so far. However I'll see whether I'll revise this belief as the team grows.