Worse is better

https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html

Two approaches to software design.

• “The right thing”: Common Lisp
  • Simple interface
  • Always works correctly
  • Behaves consistently
  • Covers as many use cases as possible
• “Worse is better”: C & Unix
  • Simplicity of implementation is the top priority.
  • Implementation should be simpler than the interface
  • Must work correctly, but simplicity of implementation matters more
  • Consistency is nice, but simplicity of implementation is preferable. As long as it’s not too inconsistent, that’s fine.

• Cover use cases to a practical extent. If an implementation becomes too complex, just don’t implement it.
• Programmers tend to want “the right thing,” but looking at the case of Unix & C, worse is better can actually be superior.
• Unix & C were ported to all kinds of devices because their implementations were simple, and their market share grew like a virus.
• As market share grew, a natural desire to improve them emerged => more people and capital were invested.
• Common Lisp tried to do everything right from the start, but never gained momentum.
• In general, if something covers roughly 50–80% of use cases well and is easy to use, people tend to adopt it.
  • Signal-to-noise ratio: Is 50–80% the right target?