Talk:Software rot

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Software rot article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computer science

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Original research tag added

Followed link from here. Responses in that Q/A clearly show the (at least one) programming community do not agree at all with the article. Looked at a tidy up but I cannot find reliable references to back up my own ideas or the ones presented - clearly making this original research — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.252.204 (talk) 10:32, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page should be removed. It is not only original research, the entire article is incorrect and beyond correction. The author has a poor understanding of the meaning of the Code Rot within the programming community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.109.206 (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article is a mess. Lots of statements without citation and hopelessly mixes two very different aspects: performance and maintainability. I'm new here on Wikipedia; can someone tell me what to do with such an article? My opinion is that is should be deleted and rewritten, but I don't want it to look like vandalism :) Realvizu (talk) 10:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You can always use your sandbox to write a new version of the article from the ground up, and post a notification on this talk page once you're satisfied with it so other editors can review it and provide their opinions and suggestions. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 21:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

merge

Does anybody agree that software rot and code rot refer to the same thing, and that the articles should be merged? I personally consider "software rot" to be the main article, and code rot should simply be a redirect. Guinness 11:02, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I personally dont distringuish between bit rot, software and code rot. I was going to edit this article to try and fit in my definition of bit rot, but couldnt really make it fit.

I would describe bit rot (or what wikipedia calls code or software rot) as when 'the program stays the same but its environment changes', maybe someone else can make it fit. (Glenn)

legacy anyone?

I am not sure that the author of this piece understands what legacy means. Legacy means left over. Legacy is not inherently bad, as this article implies, but could contribute to problems if circumstances change. A legacy system could quite happily go on performing adequately for ever. It is external influences that make legacy a problem, such as requiring a change to the system, or being no longer able to support the infrastructure that it requires. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.244.190.66 (talk) 13:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with this. Legacy code is normally used to describe system that use older technology and languages - and does not mean its buggy and in need of upgrade as stated in the article. Unfortunately theres so much thats wrong with the article I think deleting it it the best fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.252.204 (talk) 10:37, 13 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.109.206 (talk) [reply]

binary compiled software or software source code?

This article seems to be split in two. The first part talks about a program running in an environment (Environment change, Onceability, reinstallation, deteriorating performance...); The second part about code (SHRDLU, refactoring, DLL hell...) However, only the first case falls under the definition given in the beginning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haskellelephant (talk • contribs) 21:03, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Onceability section

This section refers to a single article (referenced therein) where this neologism is merely proposed. I'm not sure the concept necessarily needs excision, but the section heading could stand some scrutiny. This edit is my contribution to "sofixit"... 96.41.249.21 (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hardware rot

Contrary to the assertion in the article, I have heard the term "bit rot" used to mean a change in the code itself, on disk, presumably due to hardware error, and on one occasion experienced an apparent instance of this.Bill (talk) 08:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I think that 'bit rot' is different from 'software rot' as software rot is not physically degrading, but just stagnant in nature compared to other software in the virtual environment (e.g. really old versions of java not being compatible with new code because it does not recognize it).

The Wikipedia page of bit rot also has a header saying "not to be confused with software rot" and yet, bit rot is being referenced as if it is interchangable with the term software rot on this page. Correct me if I am wrong. King Piggins (talk) 14:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Consider merging Software regression and Software aging

This article seems similar to Software regression and Software aging. Please consider merging the three into one. Timhowardriley (talk) 19:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

although there may seems similarity, but I think software rot, aging, and regression are different things.

You can consider a plant aging, but its not rotting (yet). A plant sick (regression) but not rotting.

So is software. While software regression and aging tend to impact on performance or features, I think this section here is a bit about "dying" to be completely unusable.

so is the cause are different. While 'regression' refer to 'bug' and 'aging' refers to old practice or old technology used.

CMIIW Tonitegarsahidi (talk) 04:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the plant analogy is relevant. Stevebroshar (talk) 04:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

software aging seems to cover both rot issues as well as long running process issues (memory leaks...). Honestly I've never heard of software aging so I don't know what it normally means other than what that article says. But, the articles do at least partially have different info. ... software regression (which I think should be called software regression bug) is a very different thing. It describes a specific failure that happens due to a software change. Rot is about a general problem; probably multiple issues. Rot will lead to regression bugs. But a regression bug is not always due to rot. Stevebroshar (talk) 04:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]