No one seems to have pointed out yet that code size as a predictor of error rates (and as a measure of complexity) is one of the few findings from software engineering research that has been replicated many times. It's not clear that the studies are very good, but at least they exist. We've discussed this on HN more than once.
I'm longing for the day when people realize how significant this finding potentially is.
Oh, yes. Me too. But they/we are a tiny minority with little influence over industry practice. What I long for is the day that software organizations run dramatically differently because of this principle. I think it's one of the most profound things we know about software development, and it has huge implications, but they're ignored.
Like any other powerful ignored truth—if that's what this is—its path to acceptance will likely be through somebody doing something impressive with it that hasn't been done before.
I think Startups doing impressive things at scale will help with this. For example, Whatsapp serving 500M people with code written/maintained by <50 engineers is an impressive story. What did they do differently? The post-hoc stories about success rarely discuss the leverage achieved due to the technology choices.
I'm longing for the day when people realize how significant this finding potentially is.