211–220 of 550 posts
If Django doesn’t fit the use case for your thing, don’t use it? Just don’t use flask and then start reimplementing Django.
Also, Rails is better Django. It’s not even a close comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If library is deprecated. You replace the library. If framework is deprecated. You give up the project or rewrite 'everything' to use another framework because essentially your project is build on it. That's the difference. If you make abstract to make it suitable to port to another framework. Then you are writing yet another framework on the top of a framework. In my opinion, it's even worse.
I find it highly improbable you have never encountered a Facade pattern. ;)
I had seen someone decided to wrap a simple pixi.js project with a whole mvp framework and tons of command / facade / proxy patterns to make it like a oop program. So I hate it.
I heard it's wrote by a c# guy picked up for the project because no one had time to do so I could probably understand why. But, damn. It's so painful to read.
1. Every sufficiently complex framework-free application contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a framework. 2. If you have a talented team, that half of a framework can be much better than using a one-size-fits-all framework that is popular because it used to be lean and mean with a small surface area, but has grown over time to do everything for everyone, becoming a com…
I've been burned by so many frameworks I am hesitant to use one unless the advantage is abundantly clear. Even something as mundane as an ORM can cause massive problems down the line if you're not careful, or you forgot to anticipate the case you need something more complicated than braindead CRUD. Frameworks force you into a paradigm. Yes, to spin up quicker, get new engineers onboarded quicker, etc a framework will…
If you do it yourself, you're bound to your own bugs. When they have bugs, it's fixed by a team of highly skilled contributors.
Not using frameworks is just an ego problem, or a lack of skills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> perhaps all of them (every single one) have not actually experienced writing an application without a framework I actually have written software without a framework, so by this standard I feel qualified to comment. Not all software has an implied framework within it. Most Unix command-line utilities do not, for example, with only a few exceptions, and discounting the C standard library as something worthy of the la…
> or some wiser developer refactors substantial parts of the interface, business logic, persistence, and runtime configuration, effectively creating a framework within that application That's not what people commonly understand as a "framework". Nor is it a helpful definition because then where does "abstracting things" and "framework" start and end? No, the main difference between frameworks and what you describe is…
But there's a large gray zone between these two, and eventually the distinction is also often quite pointless in the real world.
Because Rails sucks.
A framework like Phoenix (Elixir) is perfectly usable as a plugin.
1. Every sufficiently complex framework-free application contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a framework. 2. If you have a talented team, that half of a framework can be much better than using a one-size-fits-all framework that is popular because it used to be lean and mean with a small surface area, but has grown over time to do everything for everyone, becoming a com…
Yet a nicely designed, simple, custom half-framework is cheaper to maintain than a bloated popular framework.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This notion that frameworks save you time is just ridicluous. Unless the framework is doing something really complicated and difficult (like, say, a 3D game engine such as the Unreal Engine), chances are it's costing you time and effort. What often ends up happening is you have to do a lot of useless work to get around the limitation of the framework you decided to use at the start. Since most people on HN are in the…
I remember people saying this in a PHP days and almost without fail their code would be littered with security bugs. They don't a template language, and there would be a XSS vulnerability. They don't need an ORM, and there would be a SQL injection vulnerability. They don't need a form library, and there would be a CSRF vulnerability. Now-a-days there are less security vulnerabilities and more buggy messes powered by…
Yes, and the non-average shouldn't.
Framework is a debt, not an asset.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easier still, Spiral-development doesn't have to plan anything except the next feature... works right up to the point it implodes. Thank you, I will see myself out... ;)
Did you mean Agile?