⚠️ Issue Description!

1. Complex and Hard to Navigate

• The existing code is difficult to read and navigate, making even simple changes take much longer than necessary. This complexity likely arises from dense, interconnected code structures and lack of modularity.

2. Poor Data Structuring

• Data structures are poorly organized, which may contribute to inefficiencies in data access, query handling, and maintenance. The data model likely has limitations in scalability and flexibility, creating challenges for updates and integration of new features.

3. Entangled Business Logic

• Business logic is "muddled and unseparated," indicating that it is likely mixed with data access or user interface code, making the codebase hard to extend or modify without risk. This issue also implies limited separation of concerns, which hampers maintainability and can lead to errors or regressions when changes are made.

4. Technical Debt and Legacy Code (Perl-Based)

• The system is built with Perl, which the team finds challenging to maintain and scale in today’s tech environment. This reliance on Perl adds to technical debt, as finding and onboarding engineers with Perl expertise is increasingly difficult.

5. Limited Modularity

• The code likely lacks modularity, as the document mentions the difficulty in scaling the engineering team and building new features due to the code’s structure. This makes it challenging to create new services or refactor individual components without affecting the rest of the system.

Summary of Current Code State

The current code is legacy Perl, with complex, poorly structured data, entangled business logic, and minimal modularity. These factors create a difficult-to-maintain system that requires extensive refactoring. This context strongly supports the plan to rewrite from first principles with clear separation of business logic, a well-structured data model, and a modular approach to ensure scalability and maintainability.