No post body was provided.
Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
1–10 of 11 posts
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#2When the cleanliness doesn't serve existing or future requirements.
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#3When the cleanliness doesn't serve existing or future requirements.
Exactly, architecture for its own sake is debt on day 1.
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#4These meme only makes sense for very small products.
After a certain threshold of complexity and size any software becomes a collection of trade offs and compromises, never something you might call a “clean architecture”. Its a red herring, myth, utopia.
It’s a thousand years old attempt to calculate and reduce the complexity of real world interactions and problems to a bunch of mathematically elegant metaphors and formulas.
The threshold is usually very low - first bunch of real world paying customers, real world usecases, startup market fit etc.
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#5If both React and Angular are installed and actively controlling different parts of the UI (seen it) I think it’s worth spending the ~8 hours on the replatform.
If the main database is a mix of JSON saved in S3 and “the good data” is in mongodb atlas, it’s worth spending the ~12 hours on the migration.
But if it’s going from one fotm framework to another, or syntactic sugar type changes, I don’t think it’s worth sinking time into.
Should be a clear problem:solution to any architectural choice starting with the core problem.
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#6If both React and Angular are installed and actively controlling different parts of the UI (seen it) I think it’s worth spending the ~8 hours on the replatform. If the main database is a mix of JSON saved in S3 and “the good data” is in mongodb atlas, it’s worth spending the ~12 hours on the migration. But if it’s going from one fotm framework to another, or syntactic sugar type changes, I don’t think it’s worth sink…
[flagged]
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#7These meme only makes sense for very small products. After a certain threshold of complexity and size any software becomes a collection of trade offs and compromises, never something you might call a “clean architecture”. Its a red herring, myth, utopia. It’s a thousand years old attempt to calculate and reduce the complexity of real world interactions and problems to a bunch of mathematically elegant metaphors and f…
[flagged]
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#8When the cleanliness doesn't serve existing or future requirements.
[flagged]
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#9[flagged]
Re: Ask HN: At what point does "clean architecture" become technical debt?
#10If both React and Angular are installed and actively controlling different parts of the UI (seen it) I think it’s worth spending the ~8 hours on the replatform. If the main database is a mix of JSON saved in S3 and “the good data” is in mongodb atlas, it’s worth spending the ~12 hours on the migration. But if it’s going from one fotm framework to another, or syntactic sugar type changes, I don’t think it’s worth sink…
[dead]