3 ms·

I see the framework cancer now conquering CSS world as it did with back-end and JS world. The question is do we really need these frameworks? I want to remind

I see the framework cancer now conquering CSS world as it did with back-end and JS world. The question is do we really need these frameworks? I want to remind Robert Martin's advice about this issue; "Never buy magic! Before you commit to a framework, make sure you could write it. Do this by actually writing something simple that does the basics that you need. Make sure the magic all goes away. And then look at the framework again. Is it worth it? Can you live without it?" http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/08/06/LetTheMagicDie.html http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/08/06/LetTheMagicD...

afarrell 9y ago
> Can you live without it One should interpret "you" as "y'all" here. An individual can maintain their own framework-in-a-small-project pretty reasonably. However, as you build a team and codebase, there is a great benefit to either using an existing framework with its existing documentation or to extracting your framework into something that can be separately documented. That way, it is easier for new-joiners to understand the overall structure and woodgrain of your project which lets them more easily understand any given piece. I agree with your overall comment though. More resources like http://rebuilding-rails.com/ http://rebuilding-rails.com/ should be available so that people understand how their frameworks actually fit together. EDIT: Except for beginners. If you're starting out programming, it is more important for you to be able to get things working than to worry about writing a framework from scratch. If a framework has solid tutorial docs and especially solid installation docs, go for it. However, if you find yourself trying to glue 3 different frameworks together without a tutorial to follow, you probably want to be using different tools. Find something like http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000000754 http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000000754 which comes with automated testing and tells you how to set it up.
j_4 9y ago
That sounds incredibly anachronistic, like much of what Robert Martin thinks is reasonable. Computers are layers upon layers upon layers of magic, and while it's obviously beneficial to understand as much as possible, it takes a lifetime to understand it all. Low level programming languages just happen to be the layer he started out at, and obviously preaches that everything above is mostly pointless magic, ease of use and productivity be damned, and everything below is "absurdly simple" (lol).
- polotics 9y ago
  Well no, because the word "magic" has a very specific meaning in this context: it means systemic dependencies, consequences, or action at a distance, that are uncontrolled, and of which you have no or limited or incorrect understanding. Linux for example, has pretty much no such "magic", top to bottom of the stack.

afarrell 9y ago

> Can you live without it One should interpret "you" as "y'all" here. An individual can maintain their own framework-in-a-small-project pretty reasonably. However, as you build a team and codebase, there is a great benefit to either using an existing framework with its existing documentation or to extracting your framework into something that can be separately documented. That way, it is easier for new-joiners to understand the overall structure and woodgrain of your project which lets them more easily understand any given piece. I agree with your overall comment though. More resources like http://rebuilding-rails.com/ http://rebuilding-rails.com/ should be available so that people understand how their frameworks actually fit together. EDIT: Except for beginners. If you're starting out programming, it is more important for you to be able to get things working than to worry about writing a framework from scratch. If a framework has solid tutorial docs and especially solid installation docs, go for it. However, if you find yourself trying to glue 3 different frameworks together without a tutorial to follow, you probably want to be using different tools. Find something like http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000000754 http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000000754 which comes with automated testing and tells you how to set it up.

j_4 9y ago

That sounds incredibly anachronistic, like much of what Robert Martin thinks is reasonable. Computers are layers upon layers upon layers of magic, and while it's obviously beneficial to understand as much as possible, it takes a lifetime to understand it all. Low level programming languages just happen to be the layer he started out at, and obviously preaches that everything above is mostly pointless magic, ease of use and productivity be damned, and everything below is "absurdly simple" (lol).

polotics 9y ago
Well no, because the word "magic" has a very specific meaning in this context: it means systemic dependencies, consequences, or action at a distance, that are uncontrolled, and of which you have no or limited or incorrect understanding. Linux for example, has pretty much no such "magic", top to bottom of the stack.