3 ms·
Most of the negatives you're observing seem to be a consequence of people not knowing how to use GraphQL well. This is definitely a problem worth solving, but i
by andrewingram 6y ago
Most of the negatives you're observing seem to be a consequence of people not knowing how to use GraphQL well. This is definitely a problem worth solving, but it's also not a problem with GraphQL per se -- if you snapshot the usage profile of any high growth tech, you'll see that at any given moment in time most of the people using it don't have a lot of experience with it, that's just what growth looks like.
My opinion here is somewhat unusual -- even with the GraphQL world, but I think you can get benefits from using it even at teams of just 1 engineer. But you _definitely_ don't need to be anywhere close to FAANG scale for it to be worth the investment.
- wizzwizz4 6y ago> Most of the negatives you've observing seem to be a consequence of people not knowing how to use GraphQL well. People who know how to use GraphQL aren't likely to be dissuaded from using it well by a blog post or some internet comments, so this is an argument in favour of telling people “if you have to ask, GraphQL isn't the right tool for the job”.
- andrewingram 6y agoPerhaps. But there's an angle here which is there's a VC goldrush of GraphQL ecosystem solutions, many of which (IMO) probably aren't good ideas. So there's a lot of marketing push towards solutions which represent many of the negatives the post I was replying to highlighted. I think GraphQL actually _is_ the right tool for many of the jobs people are using it for (API layer for 1st party clients), but they're often using it poorly due to many of these tools having slick APIs that let you be productive alarmingly quickly -- you only feel the pain much later.
- jensneuse 6y agoCould you elaborate on the ideas you think are no good?