What were they thinking

As of late I have been spending a lot of time working on a “legacy” system. The term legacy means different things for different groups, in the circle I’m working with these days it means a system that is no longer being actively developed. As has been stated by mean, software isn’t “dead” it’s “done”.

 The catalyst for the work I’m doing is security requirements that need to be applied. While applying the updated security polices I’ve also been tasked with migrating the system from our data center to our cloud data center. As I move through the system I’m confronted with implementations that looking at now seem crazy; however, it’s these situations where it is important to apply two mindsets. One is giving others the benefit of the doubt. In a case like this, those that were working on this system used, for the time, the best options the technology stack could offer. For example, the extensive use of WCF seems silly now; however, at the time it was a recommended approach to hooking up independent systems. When reviewing the code in light of this you can really see how those that worked on it were making thoughtful and considerate choices.

 The second mindset that is important to apply, and in my mind is more important to adhere to, is to assume good intent. This is important because even if someone did NOT follow the prevailing approach for the time, or use the best in class technology they had a good reason, or good intent for doing what they did. Consider those that came before as doing the best work they could. Perhaps they had constraints that prevented them from making, what would seem like, a better choice. Perhaps their was a time constraint as is so often the case. Perhaps, as we so often assume, they didn’t know any better, but even then, they were trying their best, which is worthy of acknowledgement.

 Now how does this help, well often it allows you to see the system in the light of what it does well. It will provide a perspective that can outline what the system can offer and, as I’m finding, it will allow you to find an approach to extend/adjust the system to comply with the new constraints you are tackling.

 So the next time you work on a legacy system and you are cursing the fool that came before, stop and think... give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they had good intentions. You will land in a better spot.

Popular posts from this blog

Using telnet to troubleshoot connectivity.... and watch Star Wars

Image
So the teaser I'll lead off with is, at the end of this post you'll know how to watch Star Wars A New Hope in ASCII art form (i.e. text based graphics)... So let's begin. Recently I found myself working on a legacy application such that I had to redeploy the multi-node application into in Infrastructure running in Azure. Two of the models communicate via a WCF binding over net.tcp. While I was operating under the impression that the firewall had been opened up to allow the communication I was a bit stuck on how to validate that the communication was working. So I wandered up to the networking area to chat with our Network Architect. As I often find, chatting with those who have an expertise different than your own requires patience and effort in the area of translation. Even though we both work in the IT field we each have our jargon to deal with, but the price of admission is well worth it. In just a few minutes of explaining my challenge I had been provided wi
Read more

.NET MSTest and DeploymentItem Attribute

Image
I was recently reminded that order of operation can byte you when trying to troubleshoot intermittent unit test failures. First, I’ll be the first to admit that if you want to avoid problems with unit testing it’s best to avoid any dependency outside of your actual code base, things like databases, API and even the file system are best avoided in execution of your unit tests. That last one, the file system, in some applications is really hard to avoid. If you happen to be using MSTest, a helpful attribute for your test is DeploymentItem. This particular attribute allows you to define a file within your unit test project assuming it’s marked as “Copy Always”. With this attribute in place you can then combine this with TestContext.DeploymentDirectory to find this sample file and then do what you need to do. In my particular case I was having an issue with the unit tests failing on the build machine but not locally. After stumbling around for a bit I finally feel back to t
Read more

Example of using LazyInitializer.EnsureInitialized

Image
When looking at making systems more efficient it's helpful to think about being lazy. A helpful tool in the .NET tool belt is the static class under the System.Threading namespace LazyInitializer. In particular this class contains a method  EnsureInitialized This method is very simple to use and provides a convenient way to ensure that an initialization is called only once based on the value of the target property already being populated. For example, if you need to load a file as part of the setting of values in an application you can use the EnsureInitialized method. The following is a derived example of using the class to illustrate the usage pattern. If you are having trouble viewing the below code you can use this link to view the gist github. https://gist.github.com/briannipper/ac2778ccd0d15b4ab217083331419ae7 using System; using System.Collections.Generic; namespace Example.EnsureInitialized { class Program { static void Main(string[] args)
Read more