I am a software engineer, I have a grad school degree in CS with many years of experience in the industry. One thing I often noticed was many people break some key computer science concepts while on the goal to achieve some minor usability improvements or some other minor goal such as code reuse.
There was one instance where in a multiprocess environment, one of the engineers wrote some library to access a database table and read its contents. In the process he/she maintained a cache of it in memory. Then somebody else decided to use that convenience library/methods in a different process and so on.., essentially cache coherence problems were left unsolved and when I brought this to the attention of people they shrugged it off saying when they see a problem they might handle it - which may be fine, but seemed like some key computer science concepts were overlooked in the goal to achieve software reuse (here reuse of existing accessor/cache code to the database)
I have seen design choices that cause race conditions or non-determinstic behavior, following some patterns or cargo cult programming because something is an industry trend etc.
There was one instance where in a multiprocess environment, one of the engineers wrote some library to access a database table and read its contents. In the process he/she maintained a cache of it in memory. Then somebody else decided to use that convenience library/methods in a different process and so on.., essentially cache coherence problems were left unsolved and when I brought this to the attention of people they shrugged it off saying when they see a problem they might handle it - which may be fine, but seemed like some key computer science concepts were overlooked in the goal to achieve software reuse (here reuse of existing accessor/cache code to the database)
I have seen design choices that cause race conditions or non-determinstic behavior, following some patterns or cargo cult programming because something is an industry trend etc.