Embed Notice

@jasongorman Your old waterfall post is hilarious; I had not seen that. For one's own sanity, a refuctoring transpiler could be handy (a sort of "enfuctor" or "fuctorizer" or "infucorator" or "undefuctorizer") so one could maintain two copies of code with minimal work, like a fraudulent business might maintain two sets of books. This is like the old code obscuring tools, except of course it should appear that the code is not *intentionally* obscure.

Additionally, the transpiler could be designed to make outputted tests more fragile and interdependent. So all the tests still pass, but minimal changes that really should not break the tests, break substantially all of them.