undefined | Better HN

0 pointssanitycheck2y ago0 comments

Eh, I read this a lot. An app architecture is not a framework, frameworks get complicated because they have to be generalised enough to serve multiple projects with different requirements which leads to a ton of abstraction. Then because they're complicated they're difficult to learn.

An architecture concept just needs a page or two of docs and diagrams to understand, and the code is right there in the app. You don't need a framework to implement relevant design patterns.

Those apps can also last longer, because there's less pressure to rewrite in React/Svelte/Solid/etc when the existing code isn't dependent on some obsolete framework - Ember/Angular 1/etc.

0 comments

okeuro492y ago

> An app architecture

i.e. a framework.

> Then because they're complicated they're difficult to learn.

It's easier to learn a publicly available framework, as there is lots of help on Stackoverflow, and usually the popular frameworks have good, or just existing, documentation.

> existing code isn't dependent on some obsolete framework - Ember/Angular 1/etc.

The "app architecture" can also become obsolete. But now instead of a migration path, you're stuck with the person who made the "app architecture" most likely having left the company.

sanitycheckOP2y ago

No, not a framework. The fundamental idea of a framework is that it's reusable, and there are inherent compromises and complexities which are a direct result of making reusability a goal.

I've adopted lots of code, some good and some terrible. Framework-based code is only easier to understand if I already know the framework and sometimes not even then if the original developers mostly had to fight their framework.

The "app architecture" does not become obsolete because nothing has come along to replace it and it was already simple enough that Stack Overflow was never a necessary part of development.

K.I.S.S. Not just glam metal.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse