> only by stepping through it with real customer data that you realized with the right inputs (not documented) it could do a third thing (not documented) that had very important “side effects” and was a no-op in the original code flow
sounds like the 'nightmare' was already there, not in the refactor. First step should be some tests to confirm the undocumented behaviour.
Some of your complaints seem to be about peer review ('approval'). I found my work life improved a lot once I embraced async review as a feature, not a bug.
As for 'break it up step by step' - I know how much I appreciate reviewing a feature that is well presented in this way, and so I've got good at rearranging my work (when necessary) to facilitate smooth reviews.
sounds like the 'nightmare' was already there, not in the refactor. First step should be some tests to confirm the undocumented behaviour.
Some of your complaints seem to be about peer review ('approval'). I found my work life improved a lot once I embraced async review as a feature, not a bug.
As for 'break it up step by step' - I know how much I appreciate reviewing a feature that is well presented in this way, and so I've got good at rearranging my work (when necessary) to facilitate smooth reviews.