When I started my side project, everything felt smooth.
The code was clean. The architecture made sense. The README looked impressive.
Then I trie...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
Said really rather well, Art and a true eye-opener for a developing developer such as myself!
Thanks.
If you need any help, feel free to contact me anytime.
It's always open.
Cheers, Art. To be honest, just the quality of content on DEV - such as your own - really helps but I will, of course, reach out!
Thank you so much—that truly means a lot coming from you. I’m really glad the content is helpful 🙌
You're too kind, Art. Yes, very helpful indeed!
Very true. most “failed” side projects just hit real users and real constraints for the first time. That moment isn’t failure, it’s the shift from toy to product.
That stage is actually a huge milestone. Hitting real users means you’re building something that matters, and learning from real constraints is what turns a good idea into a real product.
You hit the nail on the head - it's about getting the little details right, not about getting something to work "more or less" ... look at this article I came across some time ago, I think it's very relevant to this discussion:
dev.to/thebitforge/the-architectur...
What the author advocates goes pretty far, it looks solid and rigorous but looks like a LOT of work - but I do think he has a point, and it's more or less the same point as the one you're trying to make - right?
Absolutely — you captured it perfectly. I really appreciate how thoughtfully you connected that article to the point here; the emphasis on precision and discipline may be demanding, but it’s exactly what separates solid engineering from “just working” solutions, and your perspective shows real maturity as a developer.
Thank you! Well I did definitely saw a "link" between the two articles - although I think that the approach as explained in the other article might be overkill for many (most?) projects/systems - but, for a "mission critical" production system, it might be the right approach ... anyway, I thought it was interestig, it struck me as pretty original, hadn't seen something like that before ... and your post emphasizes the same point!
Excellent Post!! I really feel the same pain that you have discussed. I always thought I could make things better just by refactoring my code, but that wasn’t true. The answer was & always is that I need the boring stuff. All of it is necessary!!
👏 Your honesty about embracing the “boring stuff” shows real growth as a developer, and that mindset is exactly what leads to long-term improvement.
Can relate to it totally!
😎
Thank you for sharing
Thanks👌
Great post!! Thank you
Thanks for your attention!
👌
“Demo mode is forgiving. Reality isn’t.” That line nails it. The moment you try to use your own project like a stranger would, everything you assumed gets exposed.
Exactly—demo paths hide friction, but real usage stress-tests every assumption. Treating your own product like an external user is the fastest way to surface design and architecture blind spots.