41–50 of 73 posts
What matters for LLMs is what matters for humans, which usually means DX. Most Microservice setups are extremely hard to debug across service boundaries, so I think in the future, we'll see more architectural decisions that make sense for LLMs to work with. Which will probably mean modular monoliths or something like that.
That's an argument for components with well-defined contracts on their interfaces, but making them microservices just complicates debugging for the model. It's also unclear whether tight coupling is actually a problem when you can refactor this fast.
Whether you call it modularization, good design, SOLID principles, or micro services, etc. It all boils down to the same thing. I usually dumb it down to two easy to understeand metrics: cohesiveness and coupling. Something with high cohesiveness and low coupling tends to be small and easy to reason about. Things that are small, can be easily replaced, fixed, changed, etc. with relatively low risk. Even if you have a…
While I do think actual microservices are over-kill. I don't think I've seen code anywhere that survives multiple years where somebody doesn't use internal state of another package. Like if you don't force people to use a hard barrier (i.e. HTTP) then there's going to be workarounds.
I've been thinking about it lately and I think you are right. LLMs haven't changed what is 'good software'. But they changed some proxies I used to have for what is 'good software'.
In the past I've always loved projects that had good documentation, and many times I've used this metric to select a project/library to use. But LLMs transformed something that was (IMHO) a good indicator for "care"/"software quality" into something that is becoming irrelevant (see Goodhart's law).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Why would you use an LLM to format your code?
For handwritten code, the evolution of best practices has tended to be:
- just make your code look neat and tidy;
- follow the style and conventions of existing code;
- follow a strict formatting style guide;
- format automatically using a tool.
I don’t see why it should be any different with LLMs. Why format with an LLM each time, when you can use the LLM once to write the formatter?
Maybe there’s a point at which neural nets replace conventional programming languages for low-level tasks. But I’m skeptical that natural language models will replace programming languages for low-level tasks any time soon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Why would you use an LLM to format your code?
(the fact that said spare box would cost an arm and a leg in 2026 is... a minor detail)
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I think you’re not reading it literally enough. “Microservices” generally does mean separate HTTP (or at least RPC) servers. Near the beginning, the article says: A microservice has a very well-defined surface area. Everything that flows into the service (requests) and out (responses, webhooks)
I think a better word would have been "modularization" than "microservices" as I also highly correlate "microservices" with http-based calls.
While HTTP can be considered as a transport layer for RPCs between microservices, it seems to me to be a very inefficient and bug-prone solution.
Can you describe a set up where you used HTTP between microservices?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you use an LLM to format your code?
That had me bogling too. But you know what? A local MoE model roughly equivalent to sonnet mid-2025? Totally possible. Just costs electricity to run, put it in your CI/CD pipeline. Have it apply a bit of intelligence to the thing as well. Uh.... if you've got a spare box, why not? (the fact that said spare box would cost an arm and a leg in 2026 is... a minor detail)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a better word would have been "modularization" than "microservices" as I also highly correlate "microservices" with http-based calls.
Really? That seems strange, at least to me. While HTTP can be considered as a transport layer for RPCs between microservices, it seems to me to be a very inefficient and bug-prone solution. Can you describe a set up where you used HTTP between microservices?
Are you purposely misreading the comment? Where did it say that http was the only form of communication (or even the best) between microservices? Where did it imply there weren't other methods?
> While HTTP can be considered as a transport layer for RPCs between microservices, it seems to me to be a very inefficient and bug-prone solution.
This is so irrelevant to the point being made it's nuts.