4 ms·
You are right with everything you wrote except one thing: ship fast and the refactor is not only often extremely difficult and risky, there are cases where it b
by solnic 11y ago
You are right with everything you wrote except one thing: ship fast and the refactor is not only often extremely difficult and risky, there are cases where it becomes almost impossible.
That's one of the reasons why I've been working on libraries that could provide similar level of convenience and allow you to rapidly prototype something but with a better foundation where things can be refactored more easily.
- dasil003 11y agoSure. There are objectively better and worse abstractions. If you find a much better abstraction it can make all phases better. That said, I think Rails is pretty good, largely thanks to the flexibility of Ruby.
- saneshark 11y agoYou're being overly modest. You should mention your contributions to the ruby community with respect to Ruby Object Mapper as an example. I have not used it in a project, but in any future undertaking I will most certainly give it a look. One of the reasons I've started to look more to Elixir and Ecto as ORM is because issues like immutability come up more and more. In an ideal world we'd have a dynamic client side querying language like GraphQL, a simple application layer that maps REST to CRUD without constraints pushed upon it based on the ORM, and an ORM abstraction that allows for immutability in our models. Concurrency and race conditions are shouldn't be a developers concern when working with higher level framework.