8 ms·
> When I was at Google, there was a widely used application framework It was still organization-specific, probably embedded with a lot of the organizational kn
by pilsetnieks 11y ago
> When I was at Google, there was a widely used application framework
It was still organization-specific, probably embedded with a lot of the organizational know-how, and tailored for Google's use cases. Which is maybe not the case with the public generic "kitchen sink" frameworks out there.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- onion2k 11y agoWhich is maybe not the case with the public generic "kitchen sink" frameworks out there. In the case of Google's tailored, use case specific code, they release their frameworks publicly. Angular, Polymer, Guice, etc are all what you describe, and all freely available to businesses outside of Google. If your argument is that developers should look beyond the obvious "kitchen sink" frameworks and choose tools that match their requirements criteria as well as possible without adding in unnecessary features then I agree with you completely, but that argument is significantly different to "don't use a framework".
- iainmerrick 11y agoAngular, Polymer, Guice, etc I don't necessarily disagree, but the fact they release so many different (and incompatible) frameworks should tell us something...!
- onion2k 11y agoIt tells us is that Google is huge and does lots of different things, and that there isn't such a thing as "one framework to rule them all". That doesn't mean frameworks are a bad idea.
- iainmerrick 11y agoYep, that's pretty much what I was going for. With maybe a slightly more negative spin -- they seem to experience NIH syndrome even with respect to internal tools, to the extent of developing multiple frameworks that do basically the same thing.