Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

berk.es

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 550 posts

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#541

Post by mbrodersen »

a4isms wrote: post #17

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…

Not my experience at all. The fewer frameworks I use, the more solid and reliable the software tends to be. And you avoid the yearly “our current framework is crab so let’s try something else” rewrite that everybody else seems to be involved in.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#542

Post by cnokleberg »

I wrote an article for the ACM which covers how Google uses frameworks: https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3447806

It discusses many of the same trade-offs, but reaches different conclusions. It is true that frameworks are not for everyone, and their benefits are likely more pronounced in larger organizations.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#543

Post by cbsmith »

berkes wrote: post #515
cbsmith wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take advantage of the fact that you commented here to point out something unrelated that I found concerning in the article's reasoning: """ Companies that have.. A team that defines the standards, processes, practices, frameworks or architectures that other teams must follow. ...are amongst the lowest performers. Reversed: companies that lack this, amongst the high performers. In other words: enforced standardis…

> What they are intended for is cases where using Django may be a perfectly fine tool for what your team is doing, BUT if you used Flask instead it really wouldn't matter that much This is a good summary of my entire article, really. What I said is that on one axis, frameworks are a very bad trade-offs. There always are trade-offs. The axis being "maintainability". That does not mean one should always avoid framework…

> But it does mean that the benefits a framework bring, come at a cost.

Except they don't really, right? Sure, there can be some negatives, but those negatives, are by and large coming anyway. If you had a rule that you don't use any outside tooling, that outcome is invariably far, far worse.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#544

Post by Supermancho »

Ma8ee wrote: post #261
Supermancho wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not all software has an implied framework within it. The definitions of "framework" are always a sticky issue. If you take "framework" at face value, it's minimally a set of idioms. "an essential supporting structure which other things are built on top of" - which necessarily includes a mental model of execution. This relates closely to why naming, in software development, is considered so difficult. All software h…

An important part of being a framework is that it is made for reusability, similar to a library. Just because your code has some thought out structure/architecture doesn't mean that it has an inherent framework.

> An important part of being a framework is that it is made for reusability

I might have agreed with this at one time. A dedicated "framework" has documentation and additional software to shortcut assumptions, but a coherent design isn't different enough from the rules that guide any given framework to be a distinction. The biggest differences are how mature the frameworks are in breadth of documentation, guidance in how to achieve constrained goals (there is no "everything" framework), and supporting software to shortcut boilerplate.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#545

Post by epgui »

berkes wrote: post #358
epgui wrote: post #15

Am I the only one who thinks this is really hard to read?

In what sense? The design or contrast? Or the language used? English isn't my first language, so I can imagine I could do better (I'm the author btw). If it's the design: I really need to tweak it a little further, but rather spend that time writing content than tweaking the blog itself :D

The grammar! Do you use something like Grammarly when writing?

I must say that anyone writing in a second language deserves high respect. English is my second language as well, so I know the struggle... Keep it up! You have good content here.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#546

Post by berkes »

epgui wrote: post #545
berkes wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense? The design or contrast? Or the language used? English isn't my first language, so I can imagine I could do better (I'm the author btw). If it's the design: I really need to tweak it a little further, but rather spend that time writing content than tweaking the blog itself :D

The grammar! Do you use something like Grammarly when writing? I must say that anyone writing in a second language deserves high respect. English is my second language as well, so I know the struggle... Keep it up! You have good content here.

I'd never heard of grammarly, but like it's idea, will certainly check it out. I'm just using spellcheck in Vim. Thanks for the kind words, though!

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#547

Post by garyrob »

throwaway0asd wrote: post #73
a4isms wrote: post #17

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…

> 1. Every sufficiently complex framework-free application contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of a framework. After 25 years of experience writing software I can honestly say I have encountered many people that agree with this, and perhaps all of them (every single one) have not actually experienced writing an application without a framework. This sentiment sounds correc…

"After 25 years of experience writing software I can honestly say I have encountered many people that agree with this, and perhaps all of them (every single one) have not actually experienced writing an application without a framework. This sentiment sounds correct in theory, but it isn't based on any experience from any one of the people making such a claim."

Twice, I made the mistake of programming my own data frameworks so that I wouldn't have to rely on pre-existing databases. Total mistake both times. I have learned my lesson. (Most people wouldn't even think of doing that now; but I've been a pro since the 80's. The situation with web frameworks now is analogous in many ways to the situation with databases long ago.)

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#548

Post by m00x »

Test0129 wrote: post #473
m00x wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're bound to their bugs 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.

When I was briefly on a Go project when go was still relatively young we decided to use a framework. I can't remember what it was...GORM + something possibly. Three months later we find a few game breaking bugs. Do the right thing and send a report and hope the author's fix things. Things didn't get fixed in time. Now over budget and over the time limit I have VPs of engineering breathing down my neck (as the lead at…

I assumed senior-level engineering decisions here, not junior engineer decisions.

Using a framework you're not familiar with to build a project on a deadline is absolutely stupid.

Using a new framework without wide community support for, that you're not familiar with, and for a project is mind-blowingly stupid.

I'm hoping that you were a junior engineer at the time that didn't know better and that you learned from it.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#549

Post by 0xblinq »

mirzap wrote: post #402

On contrary. Not using frameworks (when you have need for them) actually means you build 60% of framework your self, and then you have to maintain your app and your framework. Which is waste of time and resources. In my experience as freelance developer the worst project I could possibly get is from people who invent their own "frameworks" (they just call it "lib") because they thought they were smart avoiding framew…

Well said. I've had to suffer those frameworks somebody thought they could do better without them, and it was a disaster. Nobody other than the person that wrote it was happy about it.

Re: Using a framework will harm the maintenance of your software

#550

Post by eska »

Spivak wrote: post #92
meesterdude wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies who try to build any type of codebase end up with a mess. Always. No exception. I love how demonstratively wrong this is

Every single codebase doing anything nontrivial is mess. Show me a code base that you can marvel at it's beauty, elegance, and how neat and tidy everything is organized and one of two things will be true about it. 1. It has never touched the real world, real hardware, or real users. 2. All the mess is hidden in some dependencies that handle the integration points with the outside world. You cannot escape the fact tha…

I’ve worked on a lot of open source projects and large proprietary code bases that I’d call not-a-mess. I’m not sure what that means to you, to me it means well-engineered in terms of quality criteria, rather than aesthetics, as it seems to be the case for many.

You sound very defeatist to me. I’m under the impression you’ve only worked in teams that don’t have an engineering mindset but rather throw-shit-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks coding sweatshops. You may want to look for a new company to regain your pride in your work..

Post reply on HN