3 ms·

Universal, component-based application is the answer of the "boundary" in the article. You got both wizard and engineering solution, which is simple, easy to de

Universal, component-based application is the answer of the "boundary" in the article. You got both wizard and engineering solution, which is simple, easy to delete and FUN.

moltar 8y ago
Is it what DLL files on Windows are/used to be?
- revskill 8y ago
  Sure. As soon as we could pack independent component into portable unit, then it's the solution we want.
- sebcat 8y ago
  My understanding is that it is more like COM, CORBA and NetBeans. I guess it is one of those things that can mean different things to different people. At its core, it's just separation of concerns, usually branded and (re-)packaged. Often times, that core idea seems to get lost somewhere around the way...
  - teknologist 8y ago
    I will assume that you meant JavaBeans (the component classes) and not NetBeans (the IDE).
    - sebcat 8y ago
      Indeed, thanks!
  - DonHopkins 8y ago
    The core idea of integrating components written in multiple languages got totally lost along the way from COM (a way for components written in different languages to interoperate while avoiding the DLL Hell problem) => ActiveX (a web-friendly marketing name for COM because you couldn't google for "COM") => Java Beans (a marketing name for vaporware to express the idea that Sun had an alternative to ActiveX, which was misleadingly positioned as a replacement for AWT, but when it was finally implemented was only useful for web servers, and certainly wouldn't ever work with anything but 100% Pure Java) => POJO (Plain Old Java Objects, which have nothing to do with user interface widgets or any other language than Java).
bboreham 8y ago
Brad Cox described this in “Object-oriented Programming”, a book I first read in 1989. Building applications. simply by plugging together off-the-shelf components remains a beautiful vision, and it is almost entirely unrealised 30 years on.
- revskill 8y ago
  It's possible now.
- marcodave 8y ago
  > “Object-oriented Programming”, [...] Building applications. simply by plugging together off-the-shelf components I've read just here on HN that microservices architecture is none other than an implementation of the original concept of OOP.
  - bboreham 8y ago
    Possibly. But my understanding of “the concept of OOP” involves a separate identity for each object. Suppose the thing you are dealing with is “Customers”, then with OOP each Customer is a separate object, while with MSOP you must communicate to the service which Customer you are talking about. The thing you talk to and the thing you are talking about have different identities.

Universal, component-based application is the answer of the "boundary" in the article. You got both wizard and engineering solution, which is simple, easy to delete and FUN.

moltar 8y ago

Is it what DLL files on Windows are/used to be?

revskill 8y ago
Sure. As soon as we could pack independent component into portable unit, then it's the solution we want.
sebcat 8y ago
My understanding is that it is more like COM, CORBA and NetBeans. I guess it is one of those things that can mean different things to different people. At its core, it's just separation of concerns, usually branded and (re-)packaged. Often times, that core idea seems to get lost somewhere around the way...
- teknologist 8y ago
  I will assume that you meant JavaBeans (the component classes) and not NetBeans (the IDE).
  - sebcat 8y ago
    Indeed, thanks!
- DonHopkins 8y ago
  The core idea of integrating components written in multiple languages got totally lost along the way from COM (a way for components written in different languages to interoperate while avoiding the DLL Hell problem) => ActiveX (a web-friendly marketing name for COM because you couldn't google for "COM") => Java Beans (a marketing name for vaporware to express the idea that Sun had an alternative to ActiveX, which was misleadingly positioned as a replacement for AWT, but when it was finally implemented was only useful for web servers, and certainly wouldn't ever work with anything but 100% Pure Java) => POJO (Plain Old Java Objects, which have nothing to do with user interface widgets or any other language than Java).

bboreham 8y ago

Brad Cox described this in “Object-oriented Programming”, a book I first read in 1989. Building applications. simply by plugging together off-the-shelf components remains a beautiful vision, and it is almost entirely unrealised 30 years on.

revskill 8y ago
It's possible now.
marcodave 8y ago
> “Object-oriented Programming”, [...] Building applications. simply by plugging together off-the-shelf components I've read just here on HN that microservices architecture is none other than an implementation of the original concept of OOP.
- bboreham 8y ago
  Possibly. But my understanding of “the concept of OOP” involves a separate identity for each object. Suppose the thing you are dealing with is “Customers”, then with OOP each Customer is a separate object, while with MSOP you must communicate to the service which Customer you are talking about. The thing you talk to and the thing you are talking about have different identities.