> This doesn't strike me as being haphazard.   It's just a strategy -
> how well it's implemented depends on who's doing it.

> The strategy of trying to come out with a complete, best solution as a
> first step doesn't seem to me to represent a better methodology.
> Indeed, it's a methodology that's fraught with danger - if conceptual
> mistakes are made, there's no incremental path to implementation, so
> all the work that preceded the discovery of the mistake is likely to
> need to be redone.

Nevertheless, I've seen attempts to patch single-threaded code into
multi-processor code go into the weeds a hell of a lot faster and a hell of
a lot more frequently than attempts to engineer proper multithreaded data
structures from the start.  The difference between a single-threaded system
and a multi-processor system is *not* just missing code.