> If builders built buildings the way programmers write programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization.

If builders built buildings the way programmers write programs, we’d have progressed from wattle-and-daub through wood and reinforced concrete to molecular nanotechnology construction in the first two generations of humans building occupied structures.

Bad analogy is bad because programs and buildings aren't remotely similar or comparable.

On that path a lot of people would have died due to building collapses and fires though.

Still I feel like your analogy is the better one, things are moving very fast. With declarative infra and reproducible builds you’re pumping out high quality, well tested buildings at record speeds.

Programmers don't build, they design. It's more akind to what building architects do in a cad program. They go through many iterations and changing specs.

When programmers are designing it is more likely to be in the early stages when the program is still small. Often once the program gets bigger, the effort devolves to simply building. They might feel like the design is wrong, but the inertia by then is against the design evolving.

What we need is a practical way to keep the design and implementation synchronized and yet decoupled