Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
1–10 of 550 posts
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#2Before you comment with "So you want us to write everything ourselves?", make sure you read the paragraph that starts with "Many people will argue that not using a framework means write everything yourself. This is a false dichotomy."
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#3The capital F in "Framework" everywhere made me expect at first that this had something to do with the eponymous brand of laptop.
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#4This article is about software frameworks, by the way. The capitalization made me think it was about the Framework laptop.
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#5From the author’s About page: “I mostly work with Ruby on Rails. A professional, Open Source platform which powers enormous (e.g. Twitter.com) and tiny applications.”
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#6No problem is new. You could use a facade pattern to decouple your framework. Though the extra step is often too tedious for most developers.
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#7> The more isolation, the better maintainable.
I think sums up the entire thing. Nothing will necessarily harm anything, but…
If you make sure your framework and your app logic are sufficiently isolated then everyone is happy.
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#8Before you comment with "So you want us to write everything ourselves?", make sure you read the paragraph that starts with "Many people will argue that not using a framework means write everything yourself. This is a false dichotomy."
Indeed. This excerpt from that paragraph is a good thesis for the essay as a whole:
> The point is not to never use frameworks, but to isolate them. To call them from a single place. One that we own. That we are responsible for and that we limit very much in what it can touch.
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#9Before you comment with "So you want us to write everything ourselves?", make sure you read the paragraph that starts with "Many people will argue that not using a framework means write everything yourself. This is a false dichotomy."
I feel like this response is common enough that it's almost a trope.
"Oh you don't like leaky abstraction X, so what we should all code in binary!?"
I think it comes from a kind of "Just World" spin off whereby all abstractions are considered pretty much equal, and it's cavalier to not code to the "highest" of these, no matter how many rickety chairs you've piled on top of each other to get that high.
Not all abstractions are created equal. As an example, choosing to use vanilla JS over react is not the same as hand-coding assembly instead of using C, Zig or Rust.
Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software
#10The post is promoting building applications in a loosely coupled but highly cohesive manner. It mentions using libraries when appropriate and not duplicating code.
I agree with this but it requires a lead who's good at architecting such a codebase. That person also needs to stay with the company for a long time because they're essentially replacing the "framework" with bespoke human logic.
I think many, maybe most, companies that try to build loosely coupled and highly cohesive code bases end up failing and it ends up being a mess.
Frameworks aren't perfect. But know what's less perfect? Humans. The really big frameworks try and take the human component out and replace it with codified conventions.