5 ms·
I think he started with this (good) principle: >an integrated system that collapses as many unnecessary >conceptual models as possible. Eliminates as much
by ktRolster 11y ago
I think he started with this (good) principle:
>an integrated system that collapses as many unnecessary
>conceptual models as possible. Eliminates as much
>needless abstraction as you can swing a hammer at.
And then went on to conclude that the 'monolith' is the only way to do it.
There are ways to eliminate needless abstraction while still keeping proper separation of concerns
- zimbatm 11y agoSeparation of concerns is not dependent on having a network layers between your function calls though. You can have a well structured monolith with different inner well separated parts. It's just easier to cheat in code than over the network.
- smadge 11y agoUltimately separation of concerns is an organizational and social problem, not a technical problem.
- lmm 11y agoTechnical enforcement beats "best practices" every time. (But you can enforce separation of concerns through a language that lets you do that rather than needing a network connection)
- coldtea 11y ago>Technical enforcement beats "best practices" every time. Not in my experience. People will find a way to beat even the best "technical enforcement" every time. Not necessarily hack it -- just work around it to move the problem elsewhere.