When you design software focusing only on the business logic and domain the end result will be better than if you have to do it while juggling implementation and performance concerns.
> We have no metric to use to quantitatively score one design as something unequivocally better than another design.
Given the current state of software development, it's not fair to place that burden of proof here when it's not used elsewhere.
>When you design software focusing only on the business logic and domain the end result will be better than if you have to do it while juggling implementation and performance concerns.
Do you have a foundational proof for this? What are your axioms and theorems? A qualitative description (that you have provided) is open for debate. I can say the opposite and supply you with an endless chain of examples while you come at me with couter-examples and we go nowhere.
>Given the current state of software development, it's not fair to place that burden of proof here when it's not used elsewhere.
The entire mathematical community has this burden placed on them. The entire scientific community has lesser statistical validations placed it. The programming community has endless design pattern debates online as the burden.
> We have no metric to use to quantitatively score one design as something unequivocally better than another design.
Given the current state of software development, it's not fair to place that burden of proof here when it's not used elsewhere.