The pressure to meet deadlines, deliver features, or fix bugs can lead developers to compromise on code quality. It's all too easy to justify taking shortcuts with the promise of revisiting and refining the code later. Often, this comes in the form of "TODO" or "FIXME" comments left in the codebase, signalling that something needs to be addressed but not right now. While this may seem like a harmless practice, it comes with long-term implications that can be detrimental to both the project and the development team.

Why "Fix Later" Rarely Happens

In most cases, the concept of "later" is a myth. Once code is merged and shipped, the focus typically shifts to new features, performance optimizations, or bug fixes. Rarely do developers revisit the old code to implement the improvements they once intended. Here’s why:

1. Shift in Priorities: Once the code is working and fulfilling its purpose, the perceived urgency to refactor or improve it diminishes. Development teams often move on to the next task, leaving the old code untouched.

2. Accumulating Technical Debt: Those "fix later" comments contribute to technical debt. Over time, the codebase becomes harder to maintain and scale, as these suboptimal sections of code pile up. This debt accumulates interest in the form of future bugs, inefficiencies, and difficulties in onboarding new team members.

3. Memory Fades: Developers may not remember the full context of why a particular shortcut was taken when they return to the code months later. Without immediate resolution, these "TODOs" often become forgotten artifacts, buried in the code.

4. Ownership Changes: The original developer may leave the project, change teams, or simply move on to other responsibilities. When that happens, those "fix later" comments are left for someone else to deal with, assuming anyone notices them at all.

The Cost of Not Writing the Best Code Now

The impact of not writing the best possible code upfront is felt in multiple areas, from project timelines to developer productivity. Here are some of the major repercussions:

1. Increased Maintenance Costs: Poorly written code is harder to maintain. Even if it works now, suboptimal logic, unclear naming conventions, and incomplete error handling can lead to a domino effect of bugs and edge cases that emerge over time. This requires more time and resources to fix than if the code had been written properly in the first place.

Example: Imagine a piece of logic handling user authentication where certain edge cases, like session expiration, are left unhandled with a "TODO: handle session expiry" comment. Months later, users start experiencing intermittent logout issues, but the team is focused on new features. Investigating and fixing this edge case later will take more time and resources than if it had been handled upfront.

1. Code Rot: A neglected codebase will degrade over time, making it increasingly difficult to extend and modify. Developers working on new features or bug fixes may find themselves battling against poorly structured code, leading to longer development cycles and the risk of introducing new bugs.

Example: In an e-commerce system, you might leave a comment in the checkout process that says, "FIXME: refactor discount logic." If the discount calculation is suboptimal or prone to rounding errors, over time this can lead to inconsistent pricing or even legal issues. By the time someone decides to refactor the logic, the system has become so complex that it takes far more effort than initially anticipated.

1. Team Morale and Onboarding: A messy codebase frustrates developers. It's demoralizing to work in an environment where it's clear that quality was sacrificed for speed. Moreover, onboarding new developers becomes much harder when they have to navigate code littered with "fix later" comments and suboptimal solutions. This slows down the entire team and can negatively affect the company culture.

Example: New developers may stumble across comments like "TODO: cleanup this method" or "FIXME: remove hardcoded values" in critical parts of the system. As they try to debug or extend the functionality, these shortcuts increase their frustration, leading to slower ramp-up time and decreased productivity.

1. Security Vulnerabilities: When corners are cut, security often takes a hit. A rushed implementation may not account for all possible attack vectors or data validation requirements. These security vulnerabilities may go unnoticed for a long time, potentially leading to severe breaches or compliance issues down the line.

Example: A developer working on an API endpoint might leave a comment like, "TODO: validate input data properly," while pushing the endpoint live in order to meet a release date. If the input data is not properly validated, it opens the system up to injection attacks or malicious payloads, and this "quick fix" becomes a serious security risk.

The Discipline of Writing the Best Code

To avoid these pitfalls, it’s crucial to establish a mindset of always writing the best code possible. This means:

1. Prioritizing Clean, Maintainable Code: Even under time pressure, strive to write code that is clear, well-structured, and easy to understand. This doesn't mean perfectionism, but rather a commitment to solid fundamentals like proper naming conventions, modularity, and avoiding unnecessary complexity.

2. Refactoring as You Go: Instead of leaving a "TODO" comment, take the time to refactor or improve the code while it's fresh in your mind. If a piece of code doesn't feel right, it likely isn't. Fix it now rather than hoping you'll have time later.

3. Setting Realistic Expectations: If there isn't enough time to do something properly, consider whether the task should be postponed until it can be done right. Often, the rush to get something into production leads to more problems later. Communicate with stakeholders to ensure that quality is not sacrificed in the name of speed.

4. Code Reviews and Peer Accountability: Foster a culture of accountability through code reviews. Having another developer review your code can ensure that any shortcuts or suboptimal patterns are caught early, reducing the likelihood of future issues. It’s easier to keep standards high when the whole team is aligned in their expectations for code quality.

5. Technical Debt as a Team Metric: Make managing technical debt part of your team's workflow. Tracking and addressing it, just like you would with bugs or new features, ensures that it doesn’t get out of hand.

Conclusion

Writing the best code you can, at the moment you’re writing it, is not just a good practice—it’s a necessity. Comments that signal a "fix later" mentality are dangerous because "later" almost never arrives. The impact of leaving bad code in the system is cumulative and can lead to long-term costs that far outweigh the effort required to write clean, efficient, and maintainable code from the start. Embrace a mindset of discipline and accountability to ensure that your codebase remains healthy, maintainable, and scalable. After all, the best time to write good code is now.