Maintaining or enhancing a system's quality requires significant and intentional effort. It is often easier to degrade the system inadvertently through the introduction of code smells. This issues typically stem from constraints in time, knowledge, or motivation.

When a system degrades, reversing this decline demands even greater effort. Unfortunately, many organizations do not prioritize this effort due to time and motivational concerns. Consequently, systems tend to become increasingly difficult to change over time.

A study by Ahmed et al. demonstrated a direct correlation between the time invested in reducing software defects and fixing design issues and the overall quality of the software. Many organizations tend to focus primarily on fixing bugs, mistakenly believing this is the sole factor in improving software quality. However, this narrow focus overlooks the critical role of code smells in system degradation. To truly maintain and enhance software quality, it is essential to address both defects and underlying design flaws [1].

Code smells, which are indicators of deeper problems in the codebase, tend to increase over time. This increase follows a somewhat linear progression until around the third year of a project, when it accelerates. The number of commits in a repository correlates with an increase in new code smells. Although existing code smells are occasionally reduced, this reduction occurs at a slower rate than the increase.

To mitigate the rise of code smells, the most effective measure is to train developers to identify and address them. A survey by Yamashita et al. revealed that 32% of developers were unfamiliar with code smells or anti-patterns, and over 50% had only a vague understanding. Only 18% of developers reported a strong understanding and regular application of these concepts [2]. This lack of awareness underscores the need for better education about the relationship between code smells, bugs, and maintainability issues.

Developers often recognize certain code smells intuitively, such as duplicated code, which typically results from a lack of understanding of the problem or solution. It is safer to duplicate code than to modify existing code without fully grasping its implications. However, not all code smells are as easily identified.

To combat this, developers should engage in continued education. Books like Martin Fowler's "Refactoring" and Robert C. Martin's "Clean Code" are excellent resources for learning how to identify and correct code smells. Organizations should also support this educational effort by allocating time each iteration for planned refactoring. Most engineers prefer a mix of planned and on-the-fly refactoring, and dedicated time for reviewing and addressing code smells increases the likelihood of their resolution.

A common misconception is that increasing the number of test cases will reduce defects and design issues. However, research shows that increasing the number of test cases does not correlate with the reduction of code smells [1]. Therefore, focusing on educating developers and allocating time for refactoring is more effective.

In conclusion, software systems naturally degrade over time, but this trend can be mitigated through deliberate effort and education. By training developers to recognize and address code smells and by prioritizing refactoring within organizational processes, we can maintain and improve software quality, ensuring systems remain adaptable and robust over time.