Why Writing Generic Code Is a Waste of Your Time(and Everyone Else’s)

To all the developers out there painstakingly crafting “reusable” and “future-proof” code: stop.

I know that’s a bold statement, but hear me out. As someone who’s spent years in the trenches of software development, I understand the appeal. Writing generic, reusable code feels like an achievement. It’s elegant, it’s clever, and it makes you feel like you’re building something that will stand the test of time. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: most of the time, your generic code will never be reused. And when it is, it’ll probably be the source of more problems than solutions.

The obsession with writing reusable code has become a badge of honor in our industry, but it’s also one of the most overrated and counterproductive habits a developer can have. In the name of “future-proofing,” we waste hours solving problems we don’t have, over-engineer solutions for imaginary scenarios, and create abstractions so convoluted they make onboarding new team members a nightmare.

Let me tell you why your time would be better spent writing simple, problem-focused code — and why the pursuit of generic reusability is often the enemy of good software development.

First, let’s talk about why we’re so drawn to the idea of reusable code. Developers love it for the same reasons we love clever hacks and elegant algorithms: it makes us feel smart. It’s like solving a puzzle — finding that one abstraction that can handle every possible use case. And, of course, there’s the dream of saving time in the future. Who wouldn’t want to write a piece of code once and use it forever?

But here’s the thing: the future you’re planning for rarely arrives. Most of the time, the next project has slightly different requirements, and your “generic” solution either doesn’t fit or requires so much customization that you’d have been better off starting from scratch.

And let’s not forget the cost of writing reusable code. It’s not free. Every minute you spend making your code “future-proof” is a minute you’re not solving the actual problem in front of you. And let’s be honest: how often does the “future” you’re planning for actually happen?

Then there’s the issue of complexity. The more generic you make your code, the harder it becomes to understand. What could’ve been a straightforward function call now requires a PhD in abstract logic to decipher. Good luck debugging that in six months. And good luck explaining it to the new hire who just joined your team.

I’ve seen this play out in real life more times than I can count. One project I worked on had a developer who wrote what they proudly called a “universal API handler.” It was a thing of beauty — modular, abstracted, and capable of handling any API endpoint you could throw at it. Until we needed to add authentication. And rate limiting. And custom error handling for a specific endpoint.

What should’ve been a simple change turned into a week-long ordeal of patching, refactoring, and overriding logic. In the end, we scrapped the whole thing and wrote a purpose-built handler that took a day to implement and worked perfectly for our needs.

This is the reality of generic code: it’s rarely as reusable as you think it is, and when it is, it’s often more trouble than it’s worth.

So what’s the alternative? It’s simple: solve the problem in front of you. Write clear, straightforward, and purpose-built code. If — and only if — you find yourself solving the same problem multiple times, then consider refactoring for reusability.

This approach isn’t just faster; it’s also more maintainable. Your future self (and your teammates) will thank you for writing code that’s easy to understand and adapt.

The obsession with generic code is, at its core, an ego thing. We want to feel smart, to create something that lasts, to leave our mark on the codebase. But good software development isn’t about stroking your ego — it’s about solving problems efficiently and effectively.

So next time you’re tempted to write that “universal” function or build that “one-size-fits-all” module, ask yourself: am I solving today’s problem, or am I just showing off?