I definitely agree, but we all know why this has come to pass : the availability of the Internet.
As much as I simply cannot do without it these days, back when it was barely available with a 56K modem, software makers had to get it right out of the door, because patching was inconcievable. You would have had to create tens of thousands of floppies, make deals with computing magazine vendors and publish that you had a patch for your product. The cost alone would have been enough to make beancounters faint.
No, back in the day, you got it right before getting it out. But today, we don't need to do that any more. We get it just about right and ship it, secure in the notion that, if somebody happens on an issue, well, we'll post a patch and all will be well.
What is worse is that patching is apparently become a shoddy process as well. The article states :
So he analyzed the patch and found it was incomplete – it addressed one way of exploiting the bug but not another. So that led to CVE-2020-6883 and another patch. But that patch caused other problems, so an updated patch was issued
The coder patched the problem he was submitted, he did not analyze the issue in its entirety. Then he had to patch the other part, and screwed that up so he had to re-patch. Three patches for the same thing. That is shoddy programming, because we can.