Eh, Organism would require “Ability to self Reproduce” or “Built up of biological Cells”, for example, which really doesn’t apply to a codebase. Maybe a better analogy would be “A Codebase is a Society”?
Or a more accurate title would be “a codebase resembles an organism in certain respects”? I agree with you, but that didn’t make the article less interesting to me.
I’m not even saying it’s not interesting, just that I believe that comparing it to a society, with a history influenced by people and groups of people, “social” movements, etc. has more to gain than comparing it to an “organism”.
A mule is an organism. Hah, Windows is a mule.
Why not “Code is a machine”?
That would be a rather literal analogy, wouldn’t it? Machines don’t really change just like that, don’t evolve by themselves. Many of the points that were mentioned in the article couldn’t be mapped onto a machine – which isn’t bad in itself, you’d just have to have something else you would want to say.
This is a pretty loose metaphor, and it seems like it would only apply when the code base undergoes continuous integration and deployment, and therefore only when developers are actively committing. When they stop, its just a dormant set of blueprints - a genome, essentially. I always thought companies were more like organisms than code, because companies respond to external stimuli from within and tend to compartmentalize as they grow.
I misread “Orgasm” and chuckled a bit.