I had some truly dismal experiences with code generators in the 90's. At one point I blamed code generation itself, automatically dismissed any solution out of hand, and was proven right quite a few times.
It wasn't until I used Less on a project that I encountered a generator that did what I expected it to do in almost every situation. It output essentially what I would have written by hand, with a lot less effort and better consistency.
I expect people who adopted C felt roughly the same thing.
People presenting on OOAD occasionally warn about impedance mismatches between the way the code works and the way you describe it[0]. If what it 'does' and how you accomplish it get out of sync, then there's a lot of friction around enhancements and bug fixes.
It makes me wonder if this is impossible in FP, or just takes the same degree of care that it does in OO.
[0] a number of cow-orkers have 'solved' this problem by always speaking in terms of the code. Nobody has the slightest clue what any of them are talking about 50% of the time.
It wasn't until I used Less on a project that I encountered a generator that did what I expected it to do in almost every situation. It output essentially what I would have written by hand, with a lot less effort and better consistency.
I expect people who adopted C felt roughly the same thing.
People presenting on OOAD occasionally warn about impedance mismatches between the way the code works and the way you describe it[0]. If what it 'does' and how you accomplish it get out of sync, then there's a lot of friction around enhancements and bug fixes.
It makes me wonder if this is impossible in FP, or just takes the same degree of care that it does in OO.
[0] a number of cow-orkers have 'solved' this problem by always speaking in terms of the code. Nobody has the slightest clue what any of them are talking about 50% of the time.