No, it's not as if all developers exhibit the same behaviours or nervous tics - but a lot of us tend to suffer from two less-than-stellar character traits: the "Not Invented Here" syndrome and its nefarious cousin "I've always done it this way". Not exactly what you're looking for in an industry where there's a continuing debate about code reuse.
Of course it is a lot more fun to claim you're at the forefront of technology and innovation, but half of the time we're just rehashing the same technology - message queues are about as old as UN*X and let's not even talk about the Network Computer brouha. And sometimes this running in circles makes us blind and turn us into snooty stubborn time-wasters. If you're wondering what triggered this post, well twice this week have I been confronted with this near-pathological behaviour.
The first occasion was reading one colleague's analysis for a new logging system to better track changes at the record level. Obviously an important feature that should be done right, and in this case the idea was to extend the logging features currently present in the application - thumbs up in the reuse department. What struck me as odd about it, was that he didn't want to adopt the auditing system that was added to the underlying database system in a not too distant past. What really irked me about it, was that he didn't even mention it and didn't bother to express a good reason as to why we shouldn't use the built-in mechanism.
The second occasion was when a colleague started to explain how they solved a certain asynchronous data processing problem at his previous job, in what we can euphemistically call a 1980's solution: have an external process poll the database every minute. And he insisted that this was the only robust way to do it, and it worked fast because they had hundreds of these batch processes running on an IBM RS-6000. As the problem unfolded, he had to add more and more checks and balances to counteract concurrent modifications by different processes. When I suggested that for this particular situation a message queue might be more appropriate, he dismissed it as costly and overcomplicated. I don't know about you, but message queues are generally built by very smart people who have thought through the different corner cases, and I'll happily follow their path.
Naturally, as we have creative minds (and no, it's not because we express ourselves through code rather than music or painting that we shouldn't be considered "creative") we seek challenges and aim for the sky when we decide not to fix the code but rewrite it - paraphrasing Captain Jack Sparrow: "a bigger boat, a better boat, that boat." And it is extremely important to deliver something that we feel proud of, which is what drives us to work insane hours and then some more, just to get it done by this impossible deadline with more features than were in the requirements.
But aren't we sometimes overdoing it by completely ripping something apart and replacing it with an alternative that lives up to our current standards? None of us were born with programming experience, we all had to learn through "Hello, world!" in a dozen programming languages, and if all is right, we're still learning new things every day. Yet with an ever-growing to do-list and much longer to research-list, I prefer not to duplicate efforts. Which is why open source libraries, with the right licensing policy, are a great blessing.
Steering back to the topic, I feel this interview with Joshua Bloch is a must-read. Joshua Bloch is the author of Effective Java, considered by many to be among the best books on how to use the Java programming language. Here's the single-best quote from that interview: "In order to stay sane, most developers have a can-do attitude, and some take it too far. They say to themselves, 'Yes, there's a library, but I can do better.' Maybe you can, but that doesn't mean you should."
Mind you, when I recently rebuilt a monitoring tool, I did scrap nearly 90% of the existing code and replaced it with new code that made as much use as possible of new features added in recent versions of Java. So please do not read the above as a mindless "holier-than-thou" rant about short-sighted colleagues. What I really hope, is that you remember to keep an open mind, learn about what's waiting for you to use in your applications - either in the core of your development libraries or in what's available from the outside world. And if you do roll your own, at least make a list of the arguments pro and contra.