Which Is Better: Refactoring or Rewriting Code?

The field of software engineering is rife with controversial debates, but perhaps none as prominent as the “refactor or rewrite” dilemma. A simple search on Google will present a range of viewpoints from software engineers, ultimately making it arduous to reach a unanimous decision.

Due to the array of conflicting perspectives, software engineering teams frequently encounter the quandary of turning to outside sources for input. Despite the perceived hazards, it is customary for teams to consider these alternatives as well.

Regrettably, this query does not have a simple response, as it hinges on various context-dependent elements – a typical characteristic of software development. Despite the guidance offered by numerous seasoned professionals, there exists no absolute directives for ascertaining the superiority of restructuring versus rewriting your code.

Adopting a discerning mentality towards any undertaking that could profit from refactoring or rewriting strikes me as the most advantageous approach. In doing so, you can assess all real-world scenarios and determine the optimal next move. To ascertain which elements necessitate consideration, keep reading. But first, it is paramount to ensure that we are all on the same wavelength.

Complete Redesign and Rewrite

It has been observed that articles endeavouring to tackle this topic frequently fall short of providing unambiguous explanations for expressions like “refactor” and “rewrite”. This could be attributed to the supposition that the intended readership comprises of practiced developers who are knowledgeable about these notions. Regardless, there is no definitively agreed-upon definition for these terms.

To bypass any ambiguity, allow me to outline my stance on the two issues. It is plausible that my interpretation may diverge from yours, and I am not attempting to persuade you to concur with me. Nevertheless, to ensure that any subsequent allusions I make to them are unambiguous, I consider it crucial to clarify this point.

Regarding refactoring, I generally adhere to Martin Fowler’s methodology. When I use the term refactoring, I mean the act of modifying the structure of a system without affecting its functionality. The program remains unchanged, but the quality of the code is enhanced to boost its performance, security, compatibility, and scalability. Ultimately, the output remains identical, but the system becomes optimised for a better user experience.

A rewrite necessitates the complete reconfiguration of a program with the goal of attaining the same target, if not a superior outcome. This undertaking demands an all-encompassing comprehension of the existing program to enable the development of a novel version from the ground up. This may be considered an extreme measure as it involves completely dismantling the existing code to construct something entirely new.

Developers frequently opt to re-code as it can result in a superior product and better documentation. Although this may prove advantageous, it is crucial to contemplate the other ramifications that accompany the choice to rewrite. These factors must be evaluated to ensure the most favourable outcome is achieved.

Can you provide us with a few illustrations of this?

Siren’s Song Rewrites Go the Extra Mile

When scrutinising a lethargic, obsolete program, software engineers are usually able to swiftly identify the areas that necessitate improvement. Solutions usually entail having to start from scratch. However, decision-making on a software application typically doesn’t solely rest with software engineers. It is imperative to take all variables into account when making a choice.

Business concerns carry immense significance. Rebuilding something entirely from scratch (particularly intricate software) can demand a substantial investment of time and resources, with minimal or no financial gain. Revamping the program may demand too much of the team’s resources, impeding their ability to concentrate on more urgent assignments. The estimated ROI of the updated software may not warrant the expense of the undertaking. Consequently, rewrites are frequently declined as they do not align with corporate strategies.

It is essential to acknowledge the potential hazards connected with re-architecting the program. Although constructing the program anew may have a beneficial impact on the enterprise’s financial status, the time required to conclude the project may be better served on releasing a comparable product. Following the reconstruction, the existence of new rivals in the industry may be a factor to consider. On the other hand, the cost of the revamp may render it unfeasible to acquire a more valuable strategic asset (e.g. technology).

Lastly, there are certain factors that are specific to the program itself to consider. It is plausible that the program you intend to rebuild is not easy to manage, but it is sturdy, provides a high degree of security, and performs optimally. Attempting to rewrite it without being confident in your ability to replicate it could have adverse effects. Ultimately, you may end up with software that is harder to maintain, less secure, or less efficient than its antecedent.

The inclusion of these factors does not entirely disregard rewriting as a possibility (I strive to avoid taking an all-or-nothing approach whenever feasible). Rather, they furnish the necessary information to make a well-informed decision. They serve to offer a more precise comprehension of what the process of rebuilding could encompass.

Developing a Cautious Course of Action

Before resolving to pursue a software rewrite, it is imperative to evaluate the business objectives and hazards linked with the undertaking. Deliberation should be exercised in determining whether a rebuild is an attainable option. Once a resolution has been reached, technical particulars can be tackled.

It is important to recognise that opting to rewrite or revamp your program owing to accrued technical debt and the swift pace of obsolescence is not an uncomplicated decision. After carefully deliberating the advantages and disadvantages, it is plausible that neither option may be the ideal solution. Neglecting to update the software may result in issues with longevity, maintenance, and scalability, while rebuilding the software may demand alterations to the features.

It is crucial to keep in mind that, while making a resolution, the existence or lack of risks should not be the sole determinant to weigh, as it is impracticable to wholly eradicate all potential hazards.

Therefore, in my opinion, the optimal approach would be as follows:

  • Mull over the repercussions for your organisation. What could be the consequences of it?
  • Evaluating the likely risks associated with each alternative prior to arriving at a resolution is recommended. It is not always the case that one option may entail greater risks than the other. Could you explain the repercussions of selecting one path over another?
  • Elucidate the rationale behind why you believe a rewrite or revamp is required. What are your objectives in doing so?
  • Ascertain the extent to which your current software falls short of achieving those objectives. Specify each and every detail.
  • Delineate the requisite steps to progress from the present position to the intended destination. Is it feasible? It may be unfeasible to modify the outdated program for compatibility with contemporary technology, or it may be incompatible with the latest advancements.
  • Scrutinize both procedures from that standpoint. What is the methodology for refactoring the code? Which components are being rewritten and for what reason? Avoid providing a time estimate for completing the tasks; this is a crucial component of the assessment. Deliberate on the tasks at hand and their complexity to arrive at a more precise evaluation of each alternative.
  • Exploring all feasible alternatives is recommended. Refactoring may seem to be more arduous at first, but it may prove to be simpler to execute in the long term when contrasted with a rewrite, which involves fewer but more intricate stages. Conversely, the restructuring process may appear too strenuous to undertake.
  • Upon assessing the particulars of both alternatives, you may want to reevaluate the priorities of your organization and the level of risk you are willing to assume. Devoting time to consider these factors comprehensively will guarantee that you arrive at an informed decision.

Nevertheless, the argument about refactoring versus rewriting frequently veers away from pragmatic considerations and becomes more theoretical. Given that there is no universal solution that applies to all situations, it is imperative to evaluate the possible alternatives to determine which course of action is optimal.

Using a singular technique for all projects is not recommended; this may not be the most appropriate approach for each project. It may be time-intensive to evaluate the optimal approach for every project, nonetheless, this is the most effective way to ensure success.

Join the Top 1% of Remote Developers and Designers

Works connects the top 1% of remote developers and designers with the leading brands and startups around the world. We focus on sophisticated, challenging tier-one projects which require highly skilled talent and problem solvers.
seasoned project manager reviewing remote software engineer's progress on software development project, hired from Works blog.join_marketplace.your_wayexperienced remote UI / UX designer working remotely at home while working on UI / UX & product design projects on Works blog.join_marketplace.freelance_jobs